Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 20:20:55 +0200 (EET) From: Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu, hackers@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: performance puzzler Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970202201858.13473A-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> In-Reply-To: <199702012151.OAA06709@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 1 Feb 1997, Terry Lambert wrote: > > > Your bus on the 120 is 3MHz slower than the bus on the 66. What you > > > are doing is not I/O bound, it is CPU bound. > > > > umm... this usually isn't true... most of the non 33mhz bus speeds (for > > 486 based chips) are actually 40 mhz or 50mhz... the amd-486/120dx4 is > > actually a 40mhz bus multiplied by 3... it's kinda like the Intel > > 486/100dx4... the chip is actually 3x bus speed (33mhz)... > > Memory bus, or I/O bus? > > The PCI and EISA standards specify 33MHz as their top end. > Where did I read about 66Mhz revision/mode for PCI? Was it in a dream or just a "not supported by anybody yet" possibility as is the 64bit card width. Or was it all just a dream or erroneus news article? Sander > > > Terry Lambert > terry@lambert.org > --- > Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present > or previous employers. >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.970202201858.13473A-100000>