Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Petz who wrote (18632)	11/10/2000 6:10:44 PM
From: rsi_boy	Respond to of 275872

I know that the sweet spot for cache size is traditionally 4x the previous level. 512 is four times 128 so you would see good performance with an inclusive cash (just like the classic). Exclusive would theoretically be better due to the reduced duplication - but I don't know what other trade-offs (ie:latency, complexity)are incurred by going exclusive vs. inclusive. the K6 3 did show a nice little boost with 512 Kb L3 inclusive cache even though that's only 2x its L2 size. At the time, I think AMD reps attributed this to differing caching algorithms in the two catches that reduced overlap. so to your question,I don't think we'll know which makes more sense until AMD reveals a little more about their horses. T.