DFI K6bv3+: maximum cacheable memory?

Discussion in 'FIC' started by pigdos, Jul 7, 2006.

  1. Surely you mean 1 GB RAM on a computer with a chipset other than the
    MVP3, since those max out at 768 MB?

    Actually, it would be interesting if somebody with access to K6-2 and
    K6-III CPUs, or MVP3 motherboards with different size caches, would run
    the test and post the results. That way, we could have some concrete
    data to to look at.
     
    Alex Zorrilla, Sep 22, 2006
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. pigdos

    Roger Hunt Guest

    Ah yes - I do (Asus A7N8X-X), but Cachechk only shows 64MB of system
    RAM. Do I need to load an Extended memory manager from the boot floppy?
    (I'd better read up a bit there for myself ...)
    I do have a system here based around a FIC PA-2013 and a K6 2+, but I
    can't remember what speed, and I can't remember how much RAM is fitted.
    If I can find a few leads I should be able to bring it to life.
     
    Roger Hunt, Sep 23, 2006
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. pigdos

    Kyle Guest

    What I've told you before (set forth below) speaks for itself. If you
    use a k6+ or k6III CPU, the presence of 512k or 2M of motherboard
    cache would be hardly noticeable except via benchmarks, regardless of
    the amount of installed memory since the CPU will cache the entire
    address space at full CPU speed. If you use a lesser CPU (k6-2 or
    original k6 CPU) then you would likely see some noticeable differences
    between 512k of onboard cache and 2M of mobo cache but only if the
    entire memory space is not cached by the test setup. If you use more
    memory than what the mobo can cache, then obviously, 2M of mobo cache
    will be much better performance than 512k of mobo cache. The point is
    there is more than 1 variable, mobo cache plus the amount of installed
    memory must both be considered in comparing performance of such setups
    where a lesser CPU is used.

    My noting that motherboard cache and CPU selection are intertwined
    (tho separate component subsystems) was only meant to highlight the
    fact that selecting a cpu with full speed/full memory space expanded
    caching capability renders the motherboard's caching limitations
    nearly moot.

    Tho the comments of the other post'er that you take exception with
    were not perfectly stated, it is rather rude that you did not take the
    comments as positive suggestions. This is not a forum for pedantic
    tirades, but rather a place where many skilled people try to help
    others in a polite fashion. It's too bad you can't take it all with a
    grain of salt.

    --
    Best regards,
    Kyle
    | And your answer is "much too simply stated to be absolutely accurate
    | information". Ever heard of the principle of locality? Are you
    telling me
    | that I'll see no difference between 2MB of on-board motherboard
    cache vs.
    | 512KB? The DFI K6bv3+ has 2MB of motherboard cache running at
    100Mhz. The
    | fact that it can cache more address space than 512KB would also make
    a
    | difference if I planned to use more memory right?
    |
    | --
    | Doug
    | | > | > | Do you know what motherboard cache is?
    | > | Do you realize it has nothing to do w/the CPU installed?
    | >
    | > Much too simply stated to be absolutely accurate information.
    | >
    | > This web page:
    | > http://www3pub.amd.com/products/cpg/k6iii/trilevel.html
    | > explains how the CPU onboard cache can have a major impact on
    system
    | > performance, even when a traditional mobo L2 cache is present.
    | >
    | > | I don't care if you've been installing computers for
    | > | nine years
    | > | or 20 years (I've been working with computers since 1987, I've
    | > worked on the
    | > | original IBM PC).
    | >
    | > Using a CPU such as a k6III or a k62+/3+ CPU makes a world of
    | > difference, particularly since the onboard cache of these CPUs
    runs at
    | > full CPU speed, rather than at FSB speed, and will cache the
    entire
    | > addressable memory space of the processor. The motherboard L2
    cache
    | > becomes relegated to an "L3" role with these CPUs, and becomes
    much
    | > less important to overall performance due to its slower speed.
    | >
    | > | It's obvious you don't understand the difference between
    | > | cache built into a motherboard (which was common 10 years ago)
    and
    | > that
    | > | which resides in the CPU. I was never asking about how much RAM
    the
    | > CPU can
    | > | cache.
    | > |
    | >
    | > Now, if one installs more ram than the original mobo design will
    | > cache, certain CPUs will still cache the "uncached" memory space
    not
    | > cached by the mobo cache. I don't really understand all this
    | > squabble.
    | >
    | > It is well documented that once cache size exceeds 512k, only
    marginal
    | > performance gains will be realized in overall memory performance
    | > (typical usage), even when more sophisticated 4-way associative
    logic
    | > is implemented. The tag ram limitations of the MVP3 chipset are
    | > another issue well suited for a separate google search (a little
    | > usenet searching will reveal all of the great posts on this
    subject,
    | > particularly how the mvp3 chipset designs typically do not cache
    all
    | > of 256 meg of memory in write-thru mode due to the 10 bit tag-ram
    | > implementation).
    | >
    | > --
    | > Best regards,
    | > Kyle
    | >
    | >
    |
    |
     
    Kyle, Sep 25, 2006
    #23
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.