RE: FreeBSD Celeron and Celeron ( Mendocino ) kernel patch.
> -Original Message- > From: Garrett Wollman [mailto:woll...@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu] > Sent: Saturday, January 09, 1999 4:22 PM > To: Kenneth Wayne Culver > Cc: Garrett Wollman; Bryan Seitz; curr...@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: FreeBSD Celeron and Celeron ( Mendocino ) kernel patch. > > > < Culver said: > > > Well, they are the same in that respect, but the Pentium II > has cache in > > the same package, and most Pentium II's aren't > overclockable. The celeron > > is. > > That's OK -- we don't support overclocking anyway. > > The Celeron does have a cache in the package, BTW. The cache in the > Celeron is this tiny little thing that is actually capable of running > at clock rates of 250 MHz or higher; the actual CPU is a perfectly > ordinary Pentium-II core of the sort that would be labeled as ``450 > MHz'' when coupled with a more expensive cache. (According to my > friend who does VLSI design.) The Celeron chips are intentionally > down-rated by Intel marketing to keep them from cannibalizing the > high-end market. (Remember when upgrading to a faster line printer > meant that a SE would change a single belt?) > > I think we should stick to identifying the core. I disagree. From an user perspective I think it will be confusing to general users to report PII when they think they've got a Celeron. From a support perspective it might be useful to know what CPU is actually installed rather than just the class of CPU. On a related note, I'd be interested in benchmarks for the Celerons, how does the on-chip cache compare to the off-chip cache. Paul. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
RE: FreeBSD Celeron and Celeron ( Mendocino ) kernel patch.
> I disagree. From an user perspective I think it will be confusing to > general users to report PII when they think they've got a Celeron. From > a support perspective it might be useful to know what CPU is actually > installed rather than just the class of CPU. FWIW, that would be my preference too. It's a warm fuzzy to know that the hardware was correctly identified, even if there's no specific optimisations for it. :) > On a related note, I'd be interested in benchmarks for the Celerons, how > does the on-chip cache compare to the off-chip cache. Very well, it seems. http://www.tomshardware.com has a bunch of benchmarks for the Celerons, both overclocked (overbussed) and regular speed(s), comparisons to AMD K6's and PIIs, as well as much interesting information on motherboards, chipsets and CPUs - including why the Slot 1 form factor is already doomed.. Cheers, AS To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message