Article View: comp.arch
Article #13739Re: 64 Vs 32
From: Philip Kos
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1987 17:35
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1987 17:35
23 lines
1637 bytes
1637 bytes
In article <1316@ames.UUCP>, lamaster@pioneer.arpa (Hugh LaMaster) writes:
> If a 1 MIP system a few years ago needed 16MBytes of virtual
> and 4 MBytes of physical memory (my own figures), a 100MIP system needs about
> 2GB of virtual and 512 MBytes of physical memory....
That's assuming that MIPS and physical/virtual memory scale linearly. I
have my doubts about this.
While MIPS (for the sake of argument, let's use the "wise man's definition",
or "Meaningless Index of Processor Speed") and virtual memory size may have
a more or less linear interrelationship, I've noticed more of a logarithmic
relationship between virtual and real memory.
Am I the only person out here who doesn't agree?
--
...!decvax!decuac -
Phil Kos \
The Johns Hopkins Hospital ...!seismo!mimsy - -> !aplcen!osiris!phil
Baltimore, MD /
...!allegra!mimsy -
"People say I'm lazy, dreaming my life away..." - J. Lennon
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1071@osiris.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!mimsy!aplcen!osiris!philReferences:
<3810013@nucsrl.UUCP> <28200016@ccvaxa> <1316@ames.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!mimsy!aplcen!osiris!phil From: phil@osiris.UUCP (Philip Kos) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: 64 Vs 32 Message-ID: <1071@osiris.UUCP> Date: Tue, 21-Apr-87 12:35:56 EST Article-I.D.: osiris.1071 Posted: Tue Apr 21 12:35:56 1987 Date-Received: Wed, 22-Apr-87 05:28:58 EST References: <3810013@nucsrl.UUCP> <28200016@ccvaxa> <1316@ames.UUCP> Organization: Johns Hopkins Hospital Lines: 23 Keywords: address size, physical memory limits, RAM disks Summary: linear scaling?