[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Well I have SDRAM which is 10 nanoseconds and cache is what 5-7
> nanoseconds? Not much of a performance hit unless I'm missing
> something. I don't know much about this kind of stuff though, so
> please feel free to point out any error in judgement.
> --vicki
>
My understanding is that the problem with 10 ns SDRAM is that it's still
limited by the bus speed and other factors. I don't know all the ins & outs,
but all reports I've seen have roundly cursed the absence of sufficient cache
capability in the TX motherboards. Tom's Hardware page & others show that
there's no real gain in a TX board over my HX board, and most reports I've
seen indicate a very real & substantial penalty in accessing uncached RAM.
Can't pretend to be an expert, but did do some researching because of a need
to replace my motherboard in the not too distant past. Reports were, as
stated, (1) no noticible improvement in performance by going to the TX boards,
and (2) significant (~20%) performance hit between cached & uncached RAM.
--
Rick Forrister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Opera: Greek word meaning "death by music".
--Anonymous
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
