Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 07:08:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Castor Fu <castor@geocast.net> To: Duncan Barclay <dmlb@ragnet.demon.co.uk> Cc: spork <spork@super-g.com>, freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: "Cacheable memory"?? Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.03.9809130703460.20788-100000@geo.geocast.net> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.980912212159.dmlb@computer.my.domain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 12 Sep 1998, Duncan Barclay wrote: > > The Ali chipsets, however, look much better. In general all of the buffers etc. > on the ALi 5 are twice as big as the MVP3, this may result in better system > performance. The ALi chipset also has part of the RAM needed for the cache on > chip (the tag RAM). This will help cost/stability, but not necessarily speed. > > Given a choice I would buy a Ali 5 chipset (Aladdin also re-spun the chipset to > help a boot problem with FreeBSD, that's what I call support). Has anyone done any actual performance measurements with these two chipsets? I was rather leary of the Ali5 because ALI is an acer subsidiary and Acer's motherboard arm, AOpen, uses the MVP-3 in their super 7 board. I figure if ALI couldn't get a design win with their own companies, there's something you don't want to find out. I also had a friend with a cheap ALI board which had various nasty problems which only cropped up as one started adding cards. -castor To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hardware" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.03.9809130703460.20788-100000>