[OT] Hardware Info Help

[Aaron Grewell]

The original Celeron had no L2 cache at all.  Its performance was so
abysmal that Intel had to quickly come out with the Celeron "A" which
includes the 128KB L2 cache we know today.  K-6-II and III chips
definitely gave better bang for the buck than the original Celerons, but
the Celeron A was the last nail in K6's coffin and led to the
introduction of the Duron, AMD's low-cache processor.  The Duron not
only whupped up on any Celeron ever made, it ate into Athlon sales as
well, which is why it is going the way of the dodo.  For this next round
it looks like AMD will use 32-bit chips against Celeron and 64-bit
against P4, being more careful to keep the clock speeds differentiated
this time.  We'll see how well that works.


On Wed, 2003-01-08 at 12:22, Stuart Biggerstaff wrote:
> And at that isn't it something like double the cache of the original Celeron?
> 
> Of course it's worth noting that whether they suck or not just about all 
> current processors are i686 (Pentium Pro).  I think the AMD K6 series was 
> the last i586 put in many PCs, and though they would often outperform the 
> early Celerons, they wouldn't run software compiled for i686 while the 
> Celerons would.
> 
> At 03:01 PM 1/8/03 -0500, Net Llama! wrote:
> >Its also worth nothing that Celerons have a 128KB cache, while the
> >'normal' PIII & PIV chips have a 256KB cache.
> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >Lonni J Friedman                                netllama at linux-sxs.org
> 
> 
> 
> Stuart Biggerstaff
> 
> Linda Hall Library of Science Engineering & Technology
> 5109 Cherry St.
> Kansas City, MO 64110
> 
> Phone:  (816) 926-8748
>          (800) 662-1545 x748
> FAX:    (816) 926-8785
> URL:    www.lindahall.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-users mailing list
> Linux-users at linux-sxs.org
> Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users