Date: Sat, 02 Aug 1997 02:38:53 -0500 From: Tony Overfield <tony@dell.com> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>, brianc@milkyway.com (Brian Campbell) Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Pentium II? Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970802023853.0069c4c4@bugs.us.dell.com> In-Reply-To: <199707302054.NAA05832@phaeton.artisoft.com> References: <19970730144420.16698@milkyway.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 01:54 PM 7/30/97 -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: >> > My 486 DX-50 still beats the snot of of a P5 DX/2-66, and is >> > more than fast enough (EISA bus overclocked to 50MHz) to handle >> > a lot of stuff that early P5 machines couldn't. >> >> Hmmm ... Never heard of a P5 DX/2-66 ;-) > >Dell was selling them. This is wrong! Dell sold no such thing as a "P5 DX/2-66"! >This was back when they were using the >Saturn I chipset, which did not have DMA writeback notification >connected from the macrocell (missing trace). Due to that bug, that version of the Saturn chipset does not support write-back L2 caching and it is therefore configured by the BIOS to use the L2 cache in write-through mode, though the L1 cache is always write-back. The missing trace is not used or needed when the L2 cache is in write-through mode. >Clock-doubled 66 MHz Pentiums were at one time common, before >CPU fans became common. Hmm, they weren't common enough for me to have ever heard of them before. >Dell also had 60MHz non-doubled chips >available before the doubled 66's were available. Well, of course the 66 MHz chips were available after the 60 MHz chips were, but they weren't "doubled." >The non-doubled >60's kicked butt over the doubled 66's for anything I/O bound. They probably would have, had the "doubled 66's" ever existed. >Just as my 486/50 kicks butt over the same chips. I doubt this, unless you're "stacking the deck" in some perverse way, or you're simply dreaming. - Tony
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.2.32.19970802023853.0069c4c4>