VOGONS

Common searches


Search results for AMD

Display options

Re: AMD 5x86 X5-133

I used to have a UMAX 600S SCSI scanner. I used it from 1997 thru to 2011. It was the best scanner I ever owned. The depth of field was perfect for scanning retro hardware PCB's. When it died, I got some HP ScanJet 7400C, which is USB + SCSI, however the scanning depth of field isn't that great, …

Re: AMD 5x86 X5-133

PC hardware is odd sometimes... In an attempt to further optimize performance, I changed the L2 cache mode from WB to WT. WT should be slower, shouldn't it? Guess what..? Now Quake timedemo 3 gives me 14.2 fps instead of 13.8. :D Dr. Hardware shows better scores as well (>77000). Also funny, …

Re: AMD 5x86 X5-133

Speedsys is a very poor indicator of CPU performance. I generally do not use it to compare small changes in system configuration. For WT vs. WB L2 cache, I suggest using the Ziff-Davis CPUMark99 in Windows. It is their stand-alone product. I have found this benchmark to be the most sensitive to …

Re: AMD 5x86 X5-133

Spent some time trying to squeeze some more speed out of it by trying a FSB of 50 MHz and a multiplier of 3x. While video speed got faster by more than 30%, overall performance didn't get better. Even with 50ns RAM and 0 waitstates, I wasn't able to get the same memory throughput as with 4x 40 MHz. …

Re: AMD 5x86 X5-133

derSammler wrote: So if L1 is WB, L2 should be WT. If L1 is WT, L2 should be WB. I'll double-check this later using a Cyrix 5x86 It would be interesting to quantify this with some benchmarks. I've always noticed that WB L2 cache improves speed very little. I've never seen it reduce performance much …

Re: AMD 5x86 X5-133

Difference is very low. With the X5 at 160 MHz I got these results with Dr. Hardware yesterday: * L1 WB, L2 WB: ~77100 * L1 WB, L2 WT: ~78300 And .4 fps improvement in Quake. So it's only about 2-3%. I'm pretty sure WB always give a speed boost when writing lots of data to RAM. But for reading from …

Page 280 of 1678