On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 06:18:55PM -0400, Lee Patton wrote: > On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 11:20 -0700, Eric Blossom wrote: > > ... unless you're a glutton for punishment, don't get the Celeron > > version, spend the extra bucks and get the Pentium M. > > Besides the dearth of on-board cache, what are the other drawbacks of a > Celeron? > > To fit the dimensional requirement I was given (5"x5"x~1"), the SBC must > be passively cooled. However, I'm not finding a Pentium-M solution that > can be passively cooled and meets our availability requirements. I have > found a 600 MHz Celeron solution, but has half the L2 cache. > > In our application, we'll be pulling full throttle from the USRP, maybe > FIR filtering, and then pushing back out to USRP. Not too heavy on the > signal processing. > > All advice appreciated. > > - Lee > > P.S. > > Some potential solutions: > http://www.gms4sbc.com/P60x_BO.html (can't meet availability) > http://www.kontron-emea.com/index.php?id=82&cat=58 (JRex-PM, can only > air cool Celeron M 600 MHz)
You should be able to benchmark this, including cache performance using oprofile. To track cache misses you'll need to enable a non-default set of counters in oprofile, but it's possible. http:://oprofile.sf.net You should be able to determine the cache hit/miss ratio for you existing configuration using oprofile. Benchmark the app you want to run on whatever you've currently got. The closer in architecture/microarchitecture, the better. Then scale by CPU freq, and a big wild-ass guess on cache size differences. Eric _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
