Date: Wed, 09 Apr 1997 16:05:04 -0400 From: Dave Alderman <dave@persprog.com> To: Anthony.Kimball@East.Sun.COM Cc: hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Pentuim or Pentuim Pro ? Message-ID: <334BF670.5B7E@persprog.com> References: <199704091535.KAA01745@compound.east.sun.com> <199704091755.LAA08240@Ilsa.StevesCafe.com> <199704091826.NAA02162@compound.east.sun.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Tony Kimball wrote: > > Yes, but... REAL WORLD is just another way of saying 'my application'. > If you run data-intensive memory-walking codes, typical of scientific > computations, SDRAM is a substantial win. If you run mostly from > cache or random uncached locations, SDRAM is a wash. For my own > typical applications, the REAL WORLD performance of SDRAM is > substantially better than FPM/EDO/BEDO. Let's not forget that SDRAM may show better performance with the upcoming faster processors as well, although if I know this industry, the existing SDRAM will be inadequate in some way or another. That 64Meg limitation can be a real killer for loaded machines and even for certain mathematical tasks like simulation or modeling. Intel really wants you to buy the Pentium Pro or Pentium II and this is one of their "incentives". What is "substantially better"? A ballpark figure would be fine. -- There are lies, damn lies, and benchmarks. David W. Alderman dave@persprog.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?334BF670.5B7E>