256 vs. 512 Pipeline burst cache

Article View: demon.tech.pc

Article #71936

#71936

From: Nick de Smith
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 1995 00:00

18 lines
1384 bytes

Simple question (;-)

What is the current feeling regarding 256 vs. 512kb of pipline 
burst CELP/COAST cache for a P133 system based on an Endeavour? I 
have 32Mb of FPDRAM and 256K of async L2. I gather that 256k may 
give up to 10%+ improvement for compute intensive activity (which 
is what I'm doing). What will 512Kb give me (if anything other than 
a smaller bank balance).

Also, who are the best suppliers - UK or international based is ok. 
I have heard that Intel cannot supply any in the UK until 1996 due 
to QA issues, so any branded variety would have to do (I don't mind 
paying for quality, having spent a medium-sized fortune on the rest 
of the system ;-).

-- 
Nick  nick@nick01.demon.co.uk
      European DECUS Core Technology SIG Chairman

Technical Details

Message-ID: <508581322wnr@nick01.demon.co.uk>

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

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1036bc,8c5c8e424dd8489b,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid1036bc,public
X-Google-Thread: 109e38,8c5c8e424dd8489b,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid109e38,public
From: Nick de Smith <nick@nick01.demon.co.uk>
Subject: 256 vs. 512 Pipeline burst cache
Date: 1995/11/06
Message-ID: <508581322wnr@nick01.demon.co.uk>
X-Deja-AN: 118668339
x-nntp-posting-host: relay-4.mail.demon.net
x-broken-date: Monday, Nov 06, 1995 17.27.04
organization: Ballyhane Ltd.
reply-to: nick@nick01.demon.co.uk
newsgroups: demon.tech.pc,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.misc