Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 08:47:02 01/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 24, 2000 at 10:59:27, David Blackman wrote: >On January 24, 2000 at 09:09:50, Tom Kerrigan wrote: > >>On January 24, 2000 at 03:49:37, David Blackman wrote: >> >>>We've heard claims of "full speed" or "core speed" L2 caches before from various >>>companies. Most often these caches have not been impressively fast. I'll wait >>>until i get hold of a coppermine for testing before i believe it this time. >> >>Can you explain this more? I always assumed e.g. the Celeron's cache is twice as >>fast as the Pentium II's. >> >>-Tom > >Almost twice as fast. 11 clocks vs 20. 11 clocks is fast enough to be useful, >but not as fast as i expected when i first heard "full speed L2 cache". Intel >has been hinting that Coppermine L2 will be quite a bit faster. We'll see. Yeah, I read that the CuMine bus to L2 cache was increased from 64 bit to 256 bit; whatever they did, most benchmark scores go up by ~10%. >The L2 cache on the AMD K6-3 was also claimed to be "full speed L2 cache". It's >speed was unpredicable but usually slower than Celeron, and occasionally slower >than Pentium II. Interesting. According to the specs, the K6-3 is terrific. I always wondered why people didn't get very excited about it... -Tom
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.