Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 12:02:24 -0400 (EDT) From: CyberPeasant <djv@bedford.net> To: hans@artcom.de (Hans Huebner) Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Hardware Concerns. Message-ID: <199804281602.MAA07331@pollux.loco.net> In-Reply-To: <m0yU6Fb-000008C@mail.artcom.de> from Hans Huebner at "Apr 28, 98 11:00:31 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> In article <199804280530.BAA05103@pollux.loco.net> you write:
>
> >Many say that MMX is a kind of snake oil. Since you are not planning on
> >doing multi-media, and since the gcc compiler, to my incomplete knowledge,
> >does not generate MMX instructions, (perhaps one could code them in
> >assembler), I would say that this doesn't matter.
>
> It is true that the MMX instruction set itself is rarely used, and thus
> does not contribute to system performance much. But the Pentium MMX CPU's
> have, apart from the MMX instructions, an increased L1 cache size, which
> makes them faster (~10%) for non-MMX instructions also. If you are opting
> for an Intel CPU, there is no choice anyways, as non-MMX-Pentiums are not
> sold anymore.
>
> -Hans
Ah, yes. The L1 cache increase is a win. I stand altered.
Dave
--
<----. mailto/pgpfinger: djv@bedford.net
<----|===================================
<----' Crathva fxrjre
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199804281602.MAA07331>