Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:14:13 +0200 (CEST) From: Remy NONNENMACHER <remy@synx.com> To: petrilli@dworkin.amber.org Cc: freebsd@atipa.com, rotel@indigo.ie, freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PPro vs PII Message-ID: <9806291802.aa03736@s3.synx.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980629094802.28663A-100000@dworkin.amber.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 29 Jun, Christopher G. Petrilli wrote: > On Sun, 28 Jun 1998, Atipa wrote: > >> The P2 will smoke it. Better yet, go up to 350 or 400MHz, then you can >> utilize 100MHz system bus. > > This is a red herring... the system bus was a big restriction back when > the cache was running at bus speed---any increment made a huge > difference, but with the current PII architecture, the bus speed has > long since ceased to be a problem. How many devices do you know that > can saturate a PCI bus constitently? Don't use this as a reasoning. > .... > model of execution (80-90% cache hit rate). Remember, that you can get > PPros with 512K or 1Mb of L2 cache that is running 1:1 with the chip, > rather than 2:1. > That's what say Tom's hardware guide: 100Mhz bus give a 3 to 10% increase. (Now, he uses Win...... benchmarks and it's difficult to figure out what is really tested.) Let's stop the pro/cons war about P2/Pro. I propose that those interested grab the rc5des client on www.distributed.net and post the result of -benchmark, along with processor type and speed. This will close the debate quickly. RN. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi? <9806291802.aa03736>