SCOUG-HELP Mailing List Archives

<< Previous Message << >> Next Message >>

Date:	Fri, 28 Sep 2001 10:36:59 PDT
From:	"J. R. Fox" <jr_fox@pacbell.net >
Reply-To:	scoug-help@scoug.com
To:	scoug-help@scoug.com
Subject:	SCOUG-Help: Re: L2 cache

Content Type: text/plain

=====================================================
If you are responding to someone asking for help who
may not be a member of this list, be sure to use the
REPLY TO ALL feature of your email program.
=====================================================

Steve Carter wrote:

> The size of the L2 cache may determine how much RAM can be cached.
> For example, my 1MB cache (Windows) machine caches only 256MB of RAM,
> although 384MB is installed.
>
> I've read that OS/2 uses memory from the top down, so more RAM
> memory (than what can be cached) might not be as effectively utilized.
> My 512MB OS/2 machine has a 2MB L2 cache and presumably caches at
> least twice as much as the Windows machine. I believe in a LARGE L2
> cache, and pay extra for it. Code sizes are continuously increasing,
> and I want my computers to last for several years before upgrading
> the MB/processor.
>
> Perhaps Steven Levine would comment on L2 cache size vs cacheable RAM
> and OS/2 memory utilization/organization.

I believe this is dependent on the particular CPU you are using (and maybe
also the motherboard & its chipset ?). I've chosen a certain mb, to be part
of my next round of upgrades, for very specific reasons. The fastest CPU it
will accomodate (_without_ overclocking, which I've heard the mb can handle,
though I don't wish to experiment with that) is a P-III / 850. Unless there
was some obscure alternate build of this *retail kit* Slot-1 CPU, it only came
one way: with a 256K onboard L2 cache. That's all one can get this way, and
apparently considerably less L2 than you were talking about ? So, I'm stuck
with that limit . . . and I've already purchased the mb & cpu. I'm guessing
you must have an AMD ?

My plan was to jump from 256M or RAM to 512M. (I have always used premium
grade ECC memory -- that's something _I_ will always pay extra for.) My
timing was terrible on the first 128M of it I purchased in '96, for an earlier
system. That was during a near-historic high for RAM, and set me back over a
grand ! The 256M I eventually replaced it with when I changed the mb / cpu
cost a small fraction of that. RAM prices being so low at present, this is
definitely the time to buy as much as you might possibly need. I'm sure most
versions of Win would benefit from the beyond-256M bump, but from what you
were saying, it sounds like Warp / ECS would derive far less advantage from
this, esp. without a big L2. The 256M I've had in this box for the last
couple years has worked out really well in OS/2. No memory related problems,
and I've never run out, even with at least half a dozen app.s typically being
open at the same time. Multi-tasking is one of Warp's great strong points.

Jordan

=====================================================

To unsubscribe from this list, send an email message
to "steward@scoug.com". In the body of the message,
put the command "unsubscribe scoug-help".

For problems, contact the list owner at
"rollin@scoug.com".

=====================================================

Return to [ 28 | September | 2001 ]

SCOUG, Warp Expo West, and Warpfest are trademarks of the Southern California OS/2 User Group. OS/2, Workplace Shell, and IBM are registered trademarks of International Business Machines Corporation. All other trademarks remain the property of their respective owners.