On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, Paul Derbyshire wrote:
> At 12:06 AM 2/28/99 -0900, you wrote:
> > Eh? All the original Celeron chips were sans cache, only after
> >the customers started screaming about a 300 performing like a 200mhz
> >pentium did the 300A and later come out with a reduced size cache (instead
> >of none).
>
> Really??? Hm. Silly buggers. Never ever ever ever release a chip without a
> cache. I don't suppose they were reasonable and charitable and gave
> everyone who got a chip from the bum batch a free upgrade to a 300A?
>
> And "minimize possible cache hits on cacheless Celeron chips" is still a
> vacuous condition...
I think that when the Celeron first came out it was a Pentium II whose
high-speed *external* cache was broken. The on-chip cache was still
fine, otherwise a cached 386 could probably outrun it.
jasonp
________________________________________________________________
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
