SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC)
INTC 39.37+6.7%Jan 2 3:59 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Process Boy who wrote (89638)10/7/1999 2:24:00 PM
From: Saturn V   of 186894
 
Process Boy :Ref - <What would be your take on a Coppermine with 512 L2? >

Coventional wisdom says that for most applications the incidence of a L2 miss drops off as a square root of cache size. Thus without any further changes to the architecture, there should be significant but minor improvement on most benchmarks.

However the Server market seems to benefit more than typical applications by increasing the cache . Thus the 512K Coppermine would do very well for servers and some workstations, and may be a good low cost replacement for Xeons.

As the processor speed is increased the impact of a cache miss is more severe [ unless the memory and bus speeds also scale]. Thus if you go the >1Ghz Coppermine, the need for a 512K Coppermine will be significant even for mainstream applications.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News