Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 13:00:43 02/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 10, 2003 at 15:06:00, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On February 10, 2003 at 12:00:35, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>>big your working set is. Just run your program on a certain processor and vary >>>its clock speed. If the program scales [more or less] linearly, your working set >>>is smaller than the CPU's caches. >>Come on. Suppose the working set is 500mb? It will very likely scale >>"linearly" >>anyway. Because _all_ memory references are going to be memory references. > >I figured the "scale linearly with CPU clock speed" was implied, seeing as I was >talking about varying a CPU's clock speed. I don't know what kind of memory you >have that gets faster when you increase you're CPU's clock speed. > >-Tom As a general rule, the chip makers are adding tricks to memory as they make faster cpus. So it is very hard to change one without the other. IE quad-pumping to make a cache line fill go much faster (same latency for first byte, but not for last byte). Etc. I don't have any machine where I can fiddle with its clock speed while holding memory at some constant. I'm not sure it would be useful if I could, since would I start with a slow memory machine with a faster CPU or start with a fast memory machine with a slow CPU?
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.