Date: Fri, 11 Apr 1997 21:40:18 +0300 (EEST) From: Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee> To: Howard Lew <hlew@www2.shoppersnet.com> Cc: Stephen Roome <steve@visint.co.uk>, Dave Alderman <dave@persprog.com>, Vincent Poy <vince@mail.MCESTATE.COM>, hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970411213929.8199A-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970410204608.12390A-100000@www2.shoppersnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 10 Apr 1997, Howard Lew wrote: > On Thu, 10 Apr 1997, Stephen Roome wrote: > > > On Tue, 8 Apr 1997, Dave Alderman wrote: > > > Does anyone know if the VIA Apollo VP2 is any better? What about the > > > new AMD CMD640 chipset (which is based on the VP2 - maybe it IS the > > > VP2)? > > > > The stats on the VP2 look nice (http://sysdoc.pair.com/ has some bench's). > > But I'd be interested also in any SiS powered boards, SiS seem to come > > out with chipsets which really are better than the competition, but they > > don't release anything new often enough to be a serious competitor. > > > > I do like SiS though, they're just not supported under Windows very well, > > which is oh such a shame. > > > > Steve Roome. > > Hmmm... under Tom's list for DRAM cacheability, he has: "64 or 512MB" for > the Intel HX, VIA VP-1, and VIA VP-2, but does anyone know why the "or"? > Might it just be that to cache memory > 64MB it needs more that 256K of cache (512 K cache)? Sander
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.970411213929.8199A-100000>