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 219.35+5.6%11:34 AM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: mas_ who wrote (252941)6/6/2008 2:42:25 PM
From: dougSF30Read Replies (1) of 275872
 
Mas, your link says that AMD says they were monkeying around with the cache system in order to potentially support larger L2 caches in the future.

Who knows exactly what changed beyond 2 extra cycles of latency?

Once again, insufficient data to support your claim, as chipguy told you.

And... one other thing... you notice that Nehalem's L2, while smaller, has LOWER latency than Penryn's L2, right?

---

Care to try again?

And once again, you should really consider this argument:


The architects at Intel are way smarter than most of us here, so the question of extending the L1 latency should have been a straightforward one to them. I mean come on, this is a question for grad-school level courses in computer architecture. You would think that those designing a CPU that would determine billions of dollars in revenue would at least be thinking a level above, say, the frequenters of AnandTech.

siliconinvestor.com
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