From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Apr 6 4:23:35 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from ptldpop1.ptld.uswest.net (ptldpop1.ptld.uswest.net [198.36.160.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 243B0152C0 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 04:23:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dpilgrim@uswest.net) Received: (qmail 5594 invoked by alias); 6 Apr 1999 11:21:31 -0000 Delivered-To: fixup-questions@FreeBSD.ORG@fixme Received: (qmail 5559 invoked by uid 0); 6 Apr 1999 11:21:30 -0000 Received: from fdsl89.ptld.uswest.net (HELO uswest.net) (216.161.80.89) by ptldpop1.ptld.uswest.net with SMTP; 6 Apr 1999 11:21:30 -0000 Message-ID: <3709EE06.77F97B9E@uswest.net> Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 04:20:38 -0700 From: Darren Pilgrim Organization: Neatly stacked heaps of digital chaos X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: unknown@riverstyx.net Cc: Mark Ovens , Greg Lehey , Leif Neland , FreeBSD Questions Subject: Re: K6-2/333, was: Re: Debug kernel by default (was: System sizewith-g) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG unknown@riverstyx.net wrote: >On Mon, 5 Apr 1999, Darren Pilgrim wrote: >>unknown@riverstyx.net wrote: >>>I may be out to lunch on this one, but I'm pretty sure that the multiplier >>>is for the internal clock of the chip. So, if, after applying the >>>multiplier to one chip you get 300MHz, and after applying a different >>>multiplier to a different chip with a different bus speed you also get >>>300MHz, you get two chips that perform the exact same number of >>>operations/sec. The difference is the bus speed, which affects I/O >>>performance, etc. A 100 MHz bus with a x3 multiplier will outperform a 66 >>>MHz bus with a x4.5 multiplier because the CPU will have to wait more >>>often when it wants to fetch non-cached data from RAM. >> >>While this is mathematically and theoretically sound thinking, tests >>have shown that there is little CPU/memory performance gain with a >>100MHz bus. Just take a look at www.tomshardware.com. As for my own >>systems, I run K6-2 333s at 5x66 just because it sets the PCI and AGP >>clocks at their spec'd rate of 33 and 66MHz, respectively, while >>providing the CPU's spec'd 333MHz. > >I've seen good speed gains by moving to a 100MHz bus, although this was >for servers that were doing a lot of database work and heavy network >traffic. Perhaps it wouldn't matter much for servers doing more >calculation-intensive work? Aye, in a server setup a faster bus does make a difference, but my reference (Tom's HW) is for workstations. Did I miss the first part of the thread, was this discussion about servers? If so, my apologies for my misunderstanding. Disk and memory work in a server can max a slower FSB, but if the server is being used for CPU-intensive work, then what's the point of spending extra for a server? -- dpilgrim@uswest.net /\ / __ Our lies are merely the gryph@mindless.com / \/OC/URNE truth of another world ICQ: 29880099 Death is not a kill -9, just a DALnet: anim0s make world and shutdown -r now PGPKey available To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message