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.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Dan3 who wrote (75450)10/14/1999 2:01:00 AM
From: Tenchusatsu  Read Replies (2) of 1572772
 
Dan, first of all, Athlon isn't running 1/3 L2 cache speed yet.

Second, Coppermine's full-speed L2 cache is definitely not "a brick wall in the way of clock increases." On the contrary, the on-die L2 cache is more scalable in frequency than an off-chip version. And I don't believe Coppermine's L2 cache is hampering its potential clock speeds. The worst that can happen is perhaps one (maybe two) additional clocks of latency as Coppermine hits speeds beyond 800 MHz.

Third, Athlon's off-chip L2 cache will definitely become a liability as it moves from 1/2 speed to 1/3 speed. They'll have to move the L2 cache onto the chip sooner or later.

To be sure, the L2 cache isn't the end-all-be-all of performance. And Coppermine is definitely not going to blaze far ahead of Athlon. But if I were you, I wouldn't be knocking on Coppermine's L2 cache, especially since it's one of the factors that allows Intel to pump even more life into a 4-5 year old core.

Tenchusatsu
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News