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 : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jbn3 who wrote (48872)	6/24/1998 7:14:00 AM
From: rudedog	Respond to of 176387

3 - Axil chose a memory scheme for 8-way which did not have 'uniform memory access' - it was essentially 2 4-way systems lashed together, and if the memory that a processor needed was controlled by the 'other' 4-way block, memory access was much slower, as much as 4 to 8 memory cycles penalty. NT counts on this uniform access speed for good performance. CPQ and MSFT had done a lot of research into this which is why they invested (directly in CPQ's case) in the corollary approach. Deschutes (Xeon) also helped kill Axil, since a 4-way Xeon has better performance than an 8-way PPro using Axil (which does not support Xeon). Intel's purchase of Corollary was the final nail in Axil's coffin on this, since the Intel/Corollary design has substantial performance benefits over Axil's approach and is also the architectural standard.