Re: Caught by cache?

Article View: demon.tech.pc

Article #68799

#68799

From: Mike
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 00:00

6 lines
717 bytes

On the subject of caches, what is the received wisdom on 512K caches? The 
last I heard they were only giving around 2% improvement over 256K, though 
that was before 150/166MHz+ devices appeared.

Mike

Technical Details

Message-ID: <830540394snz@myth.demon.co.uk>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail

References: <317fe11f.2662980@news.demon.co.uk>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1036bc,7858595a79b6a65d
X-Google-Attributes: gid1036bc,public
From: Mike <zeus@myth.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Caught by cache?
Date: 1996/04/26
Message-ID: <830540394snz@myth.demon.co.uk>
X-Deja-AN: 151606270
x-nntp-posting-host: myth.demon.co.uk
references: <317fe11f.2662980@news.demon.co.uk>
x-mail2news-path: myth.demon.co.uk
organization: The Home for Deranged Hackerfolk
reply-to: zeus@myth.demon.co.uk
newsgroups: demon.tech.pc

Reply to Parent Message