JT said:
With conventional SDRAM, data is only transfered on one edge (either rising
or falling) of the clock. With DDR, data is transfered on each edge. twice
the data in the same amout of time.
This is where I have a slight problem.
Its a while since I looked at any bus timing diagrams for
computers but you appear be saying data is traveling at twice
the frequency of the clock, which it self is travelling as fast as the
bus can manage, which appears to be a contradiction but maybe
not. As i said I am a little 'rusty' on this
When DDR first came out, and processors
were a lot slower than they are today, 10% was in the ball park for speed
increases seen. On chip cache, which had been designed was the main
reason.
So you are saying most data is fetched from cache so bus speed (FSB)
doenst make that much difference.
Processor speeds have more than doubled since that time, and cache alone
can't make up for the memory bottleneck.
I see.
You seem to do a considerable amout of guessing about that which you have
no experiance with.
Well I admit I haven't familarised myself that much which the recent
technology untill recently. But I think 'guessing' is a bit over the top.
I still have some machines around that are almost as
slow as your Cyrix. There is a lot of content that will not be useable on
your Cyrix.
Such as?
Pegs the CPU usage on faster machines easily.
Pegs?
We are not talking just picking up a piece. We are talking about actually
doing something with it. It can easily take several thousand memory cycles
to process data from the internet into something on the screen.
If microsoft wrote the code maybe.
I have tried doing a search in regedit you know, which take a hundred or
more
times longer than necessary, as does most of the microsoft sh*te.
You can so a hell of a lot in 2000 cycles.
The big bandwith 'things' are file downloads which require minimal
processing.
Add game
play logic, overhead for the protocols, interuptions from popup windows,
Which contain data which has to be sent and would make zero difference
to through put.
(or the overhead of the program that blocks them) and your Cyrix is pretty
well left in the dust.
I very much doubt that.
I am pretty sure my machine would be just as quick as a modern one.
Music is not a terribly bandwidth hungry application. Java is running on
your machine, so your internet connection is not likely a major problem
there. You could always do something like actually look at processor load,
but it seems you would rather guess than learn the facts.
Says someone who hardly ever puts any facts in his posts!!!!!!
You are doing plenty of 'guessing' yourself so don't be so condescending.
I did look at the CPU when playing music just after I posted, I can't
do everything at once you know. I only have one pair of hands.
I presume you have DDR hands.
In that case, it is adequate for your needs for today. Not for mine or most
of my customers and friends.
Well please elabotate and don't leave me guessing what it is you do,
thats rather rich coming from someone who so dispised people
guessing isn't it don't you think!!!!
I can't think of anything which required more processing and anyway.
I doubt you disk drive can spin 10 times faster than mine!!
Nowhere near it infact.
