home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.arch
- Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!wam.umd.edu!rsrodger
- From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
- Subject: Re: 100 Mips Intel NeXT (processor comparison)
- Message-ID: <1992Dec31.022317.17674@wam.umd.edu>
- Sender: usenet@wam.umd.edu (USENET News system)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: rac1.wam.umd.edu
- Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
- References: <1992Dec24.190008.25875@ohsu.edu> <BzvJys.CwD@cs.mcgill.ca> <1992Dec31.013141.132685@zeus.calpoly.edu>
- Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 02:23:17 GMT
- Lines: 34
-
- In article <1992Dec31.013141.132685@zeus.calpoly.edu> mneideng@thidwick.acs.calpoly.edu (Mark Neidengard) writes:
- >I think that the way of getting around this bottleneck is to use EXTENSIVE
- >caching with sophisticated read-ahead logic. I figure that a 200 MHz
- >processor like the Alpha should be mated with 5 ns RAM in order to do "hot
- >cycle" memory access, which is a practical impossibility. So, like everyone
- >else, they have waitstates and attempts at caching. And the Alpha is only
- >the tip of the iceberg. If you got a chip that executes a lot of
- >instructions at once (say, three or more in parallel sustained), just
- >trying to keep the instruction prefetch pipelines filled would require more
- >throughput than the memory bus could handle. The only solution will have to
- >be making faster memory, and caching to a farethewell until then.
- >
- >Don't be surprised if CPU's start coming out with 1 meg of onboard cache
- >within the next year...
-
-
- Is this really likely, given the complexity (according to
- net rumor) already involved in fabricating the Alpha?
-
-
- >
- >Mark Neidengard
- >mneideng@cosmos.acs.calpoly.edu
- >"You gotta concentrate on the mission you be takin'.
- > It's not so much the mission, but you got crazy ignition!"
- > A Tribe Called Quest
- >
-
-
- --
- Blaming society for your problems is like blaming clouds for rain.
- --- Boycott == censorship == cowardice ---
- Do I even need to point out that my views do not represent
- those of my employer, institution or relations?
-