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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steve Porter who wrote (39168)	10/13/1998 2:26:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1573435

Steve - Re: "Do you think you need an on chip L2 cache with 128K of L1 on the chip?.." You can generally use ALL the fast access/low latency cash you can get. Now, AMD has to come up with >500 MHz SRAM chips for the off-CPU L2 cache. These won't be easy to come by - or cheap - with <2 nS Cycle time. Paul

To: Steve Porter who wrote (39168)	10/13/1998 2:28:00 PM
From: Maxwell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573435

Steve: <<Do you think you need an on chip L2 cache with 128K of L1 on the chip?>> 128K L1 cache is not really big enough for applications used in server. L2 is definitely needed to improve performance. <<"Is AMD sure they can incorporate a 128K L1 cache and not slow the processor down by doing so"?>> To get around this problem Alpha 21264 (128K L1 - 64K data/64K instruction) uses latency of 2 in their L1 cache. At 500MHz+ it takes 2 clock cycles to write or store. I presume it is the same for the K7. Maxwell