Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 15:52:30 01/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 24, 2000 at 18:43:48, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On January 24, 2000 at 10:59:27, David Blackman wrote: >>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. >> >>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. > >sorry but i cannot agree here. > >depends massively on the program you do test with: >cstal e.g. on a k6-3/450 is 2x faster than on a k6-2/450. >and i don't think it runs slower on a k6-2 than on a pentium2/3 >or a celeron. Read the post again. We're talking about cache speed, not processor speed. -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.