On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 13:34:06 +0100, Gabriel Paubert composed: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 12:12:56PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > that may be because of the smallish amount of RAM on this thing; > > > interleaved i was getting pretty much the same ratings. it may have to > > > do with the RAM sticks' actual ms speed rating - i have 4MB sticks @ 70 > > > ms IIRC, and some 8MB sticks @ 60 ms. > > > > us (microseconds), I guess? > > Better but not quite yet, only 3 orders of magnitude off instead of 6 ;-) > Memory access times were already counted in nanoseconds 25 years ago.
oops, heh. i guess i forgot what the measurement was. nanoseconds seems more correct - microseconds seems um, slow, lol. > > BTW, I get 45 MB/s for the buffer-cache on my 66 MHz SDRAM. > > Looks still very low, very conservative bridge timings? This means a > cache line read (32 bytes) every 700ns or so. Even if you dirty every > cache line, doubling the traffic, this means 350ns per burst transfer. you lost me there. simon > Regards, > Gabriel > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* |UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are.| *-----------------------------------------------------------------* | ,''`. http://www.debian.org/ | http://www.nuit.ca/ | | : :' : Debian GNU/Linux | http://simonraven.nuit.ca/ | | `. `' | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `- | PGP key: 3744 810B 50F5 187E | *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
