PPro

From: Ken Seefried <ken_at_seefried.com>
Date: Tue Jan 22 22:25:18 2002

Once again, Wizard wrote:
>Soothe...

Sure, Bevis...

>I was trying to see your thoughts on PPros,
>keep in mind that PII and PIII are based on P6 which is PPro's
>original design.

Not the original design, the implimented design. Do pay attention: the PII
was in most respects a reduced cost implimentation of the PPro with updated
fab technology.

> Also PPro boards relied on 72pin simms which is not
> that great of a bandwith and capacity,

Wrong...both of my PPro machines (Intel PR440 motherboards) use ECC EDO
DIMMs. The IBM, Digital, HP and many other PPros used DIMMs as well.

Also...once you understand computer architecture fundamentals a bit better,
you'll figure out that modern processors are generally not tied to a
particular memory subsytem. You can do all sorts of things to trade off
between cost and speed.

For example, my DEC Alpha PC64 uses 4 standard 72-pin ECC SIMMs for a
128-bit wide (+ECC) memory bus, which is in practice quite fast.

And as far as capacity, 128MB 72-pin SIMMs are pretty common. Not bad
capacity considering their obsolescence.

> SDRAM has best density and
> good bandwith, also still good cost even cost has recently risen.

You actually want to compare performance and density of memory technologies
that are years appart. Clearly, the DC-3 was the crappiest airplane of all
time, because the 767 is so much better.

> That the reason for later machines w/ PII/PIII, Xeon and it's
> relatives P4 northwoods /w DDR (not the 1st generation P4), athlons.
> still stands

Ummm...random buzzword generator? Not even remotely intellegable.

Or is it that you think it's remotely relevant to compare the PPro to chips
which are 2 or 3 generations newer?

D00d! The 386 b10wz compared to my P4. Duh.

> Most of my scorn lies w/
> PPro's chipsets more than CPU themselves. Same w/ celeron. It is
> okay but...

First...what's wrong with the 440FX? Or the 450GX? Or the 450KX? Or the
440LX (also, BTW, used for your vaunted PII)? Or the Micron, Via & SiS PPro
chipsets for the PPro? And the last time I checked, most motherboards
supported PII, PIII & Celeron. So what exactly is wrong with the BX, etc.
that is specific to the Celeron such that it earns your "scorn" <snicker>?
Details, that is...not nonsense like we've gotten till now.

ObBigGiantClue: you can't ding a chipset for not supporting technology that
didn't even exist when the chipset came out (like AGP or SDRAM).

Second...make up your mind. Is it the processor you criticize (with no
detail, of course, in all previous postings) or the chipset. You do realize
they are different animals, right?
Received on Tue Jan 22 2002 - 22:25:18 GMT