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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD)
AMD 203.77-1.1%3:59 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: pirasa2 who wrote (238689)8/13/2007 3:15:59 PM
From: Joe NYCRead Replies (1) of 275872
 
pirasa,

6MB L3 is too little for something that gives you 5X cache density, don't you think?

That's why I think the 6MB is SRAM rather than ZRAM. ZRAM would have been in 10s of MB.

How do you come to the conclusion that it will be slower than SRAM?

I recall reading some specs. Faster than DRAM and eDRAM, a little slower than SRAM.

Perhaps ZRAM, if it is indeed slower, will pave the way for similar designs, i.e. a humongous L2 or L3 cache chip residing in a cartridge or even sitting on an extra AM2+ slot.

In server parts (where these parts would naturally start), devoting 50 to 100mm2 of die to L3 is not unprecendented. On 45nm, that gives you 10s of MB of L3 (IIRC). So there is no need to go off chip.

Joe
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