From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Apr 6 4:23: 7 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from ptldpop1.ptld.uswest.net (ptldpop1.ptld.uswest.net [198.36.160.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CBD9314E14 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 04:23:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dpilgrim@uswest.net) Received: (qmail 5474 invoked by alias); 6 Apr 1999 11:21:05 -0000 Delivered-To: fixup-questions@FreeBSD.ORG@fixme Received: (qmail 5459 invoked by uid 0); 6 Apr 1999 11:21:04 -0000 Received: from fdsl89.ptld.uswest.net (HELO uswest.net) (216.161.80.89) by ptldpop1.ptld.uswest.net with SMTP; 6 Apr 1999 11:21:04 -0000 Message-ID: <3709EDEB.BE17A2E8@uswest.net> Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 04:20:11 -0700 From: Darren Pilgrim Organization: Neatly stacked heaps of digital chaos X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Dragon Knight ][" Cc: FreeBSD Questions Subject: Re: K6-2/333, was: Re: Debug kernel by default (was: System sizewith -g) References: <3709569A.70EEC38A@uswest.net> <37097B00.2186EB92@dtgnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG "Dragon Knight ][" wrote: > Darren Pilgrim wrote: > > While this is mathematically and theoretically sound thinking, tests > > have shown that there is little CPU/memory performance gain with a > > 100MHz bus. Just take a look at www.tomshardware.com. As for my own > > systems, I run K6-2 333s at 5x66 just because it sets the PCI and AGP > > clocks at their spec'd rate of 33 and 66MHz, respectively, while > > providing the CPU's spec'd 333MHz. > > > > As you say, there is a little CPU/Memory performance increase at 100MHz fsb. > So I do not see your logic in setting your chips at 5x66 because it puts your > PCI and AGP where they should be. One of the 'specs' of the 100MHz fsb is > that PCI and AGP cards will run at their normal speed of 33 and 66MH. I believe > this is also true of the 95MHz busses. Actually I said "there is little", I didn't put an "a" in there. Plus the only performance increases I've ever seen are on stress-test benchmarks where the disk, memory, and video are all in use at once. This situation is purely for performance testing, there's is no real- world application. 95MHz produces slower AGP/PCI clocks and, lacking a performance gain with a faster FSB, using 66MHz to get faster AGP/PCI clocks makes more sense if your CPU isn't rated for a 100MHz multiple. This is just splitting hairs; IRL, a <4MHz clock difference is nothing performance wise. Your cards might complain about it though. Particularly the ones that rely on the bus-clock for their internal clocks, like some sound and video cards. -- dpilgrim@uswest.net /\ / __ Our lies are merely the gryph@mindless.com / \/OC/URNE truth of another world ICQ: 29880099 Death is not a kill -9, just a DALnet: anim0s make world and shutdown -r now PGPKey available To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message