Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 15:19:44 -0500 From: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@americantv.com> To: don@PartsNow.com Cc: Marty Leisner <leisner@sdsp.mc.xerox.com>, Jacques Hugo <jacques@wired.ctech.ac.za>, questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: mmx or ppro Message-ID: <19971014151944.32673@right.PCS> In-Reply-To: <3443CA23.2697@PartsNow.com>; from Don Wilde on Oct 10, 1997 at 12:38:11PM -0700 References: <9710141846.AA00297@gnu.sdsp.mc.xerox.com> <3443CA23.2697@PartsNow.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Oct 10, 1997 at 12:38:11PM -0700, Don Wilde wrote: > Since no software is written for MMX extensions, a PPro will work better > than a Pentium/MMX, but a PentiumII will beat either, since a) it has > larger caches and b) it has faster clock rates. Even if the software I thought we went over this before? A PPro has a lower clock rate than the P-II (all you overclockers can sit down for the moment), but it's L2 cache is twice the speed of a P-II, which makes a significant difference, depending on the workload involved. Besides, (according the the Microprocessor Report) Intel also makes a PPro with a 1MB 2-Lvl cache. That isn't exactly what I would call small. (or cheap, for that matter). -- Jonathan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19971014151944.32673>