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: EricRR who wrote (114407)6/5/2000 4:04:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu  Read Replies (1) of 1574261
 
Ratbert, <First, is this 11 clocks with or without the L1 miss latency?>

Probably without.

<Second, is it true that a higher latency is needed to design the core to be taken to higher frequencies? If so, can one guess at the max frequency by looking at the latency limit?>

Scumbria would know better than I would, but I'd imagine that if the latency is limiting the clock speed, AMD can easily crank up the latency by a clock or two without much of an impact on performance.

For example, back when Intel made the transition from Klamath (0.35u Pentium II) to Deschutes (0.25u Pentium II), the L2 cache latency was increased slightly. This made Deschutes a little slower than Klamath at the same clock speeds, but it also allowed Deschutes to scale to higher frequencies than what Klamath could ever hope to reach. In the same sense, AMD could do the same thing with T-bird's L2 latency if necessary.

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