From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Apr  2 15:32:34 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA05202
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 2 Apr 1997 15:32:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rocky.mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA05188
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 2 Apr 1997 15:32:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.mt.sri.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA17367; Wed, 2 Apr 1997 16:32:24 -0700 (MST)
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 16:32:24 -0700 (MST)
Message-Id: <199704022332.QAA17367@rocky.mt.sri.com>
From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.org>
Cc: mika ruohotie <bsdhack@shadows.aeon.net>,
        macgyver@db-net.com (Wilson MacGyver), hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: p166 vs. p166mmx 
In-Reply-To: <199704022109.WAA14871@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>
References: <199704021219.PAA03426@shadows.aeon.net>
	<199704022109.WAA14871@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>
X-Mailer: VM 6.22 under 19.15 XEmacs Lucid
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Hmm, I don't know.  I heard reports that a PP150 w/ 512k cache was
> almost as good as a PP200 2/ 256k.

I'd have a *really* hard time believing it, especially given Intel's
numbers on their WWW site.  I've been going with the PP200-256K chip
vs. the 512K chip due to the $800 difference in chip costs and the 4-5%
difference in performance seen by the benchmarks on Intels site.


Nate