At 09:19 AM 8/30/98 -0600, you wrote:
Where do you get this number ( < 5 %)?
I would think that to measure the performance of a computer having no cache above 64 M one would have to do really specific tests and the result would be very application dependent.
Your post makes it sound as if caching has not much effect at all.
I think that's giving the wrong picture.
You say, it "evens out..." - maybe under certain circumstances with heavy disk I/O and using DMA but on the other side, when you have a CPU-intensive application using more than 64 M or a multiuser system with more than one user you most certainly pay a penalty.
I personally would stay away from a system like that as well as other Intel marketing gimmicks like Celeron.
Samartha
PS.: On the Intel web site, there is a comparison of Celeron processor with the same speed, one with and one without cache. - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Several people have made comparisons using >64MB memory and 64MB and less with the intel tx chip set. This has nothing to do with the celeron and whether a board/cpu has an l2 cache or not. Jerome K. - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e