Yes - I *think* the main gain comes from the build process not having to
put anything on my swap space.
I was able to upgrade my 8500 with 8 of the 128 MB DIMMs at about $30-35
per DIMM. I think it's even a little cheaper now, even if you buy them
new. When you are ready, take a look at http://w
On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 14:20:05 -0600, vinai composed:
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Michel Lanners wrote:
>
>
> (both 4.5 GB 4200 or 5400 RPM drives, can't remember right now). But
> I have a G3 375 MHz CPU (512 KB L2 cache) and 1 GB RAM, and those let
> me get kernel compile times under 20 minutes.
This is with a 604 processor, right? Then yes, you should try to get a
cheap cache DIMM from Ebay. For the 7x00/8x00 machines cache increased
performance by up to 20%.
I've got a cache card from my 7600 I'm getting rid of. You can
contact me off list if you want - otherwise I'll sell it on eBa
On 24 Jan, this message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] echoed through cyberspace:
>> > > BTW, I get 45 MB/s for the buffer-cache on my 66 MHz SDRAM.
>> >
>> > Looks still very low, very conservative bridge timings? This means a
>> > cache line read (32 bytes) every 700ns or so. Even if you dirty every
>>
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Michel Lanners wrote:
> Well, personally, I would probably not invest in a SCSI controller.
> IDE disks and controllers are dirt cheap for very decent performance,
> whereas even an oldish fast-wide SCSI controller is still expensive.
I would agree with this. If you have a l
On 23 Jan, this message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] echoed through cyberspace:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 22:26:00 +0100, Michel Lanners composed:
>> On 22 Jan, this message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] echoed through cyberspace:
>>
>> >> - check your hard disk speed: hdparm -tT /dev/
>> >> (is non-destru
On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 10:46:17AM +0100, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 08:12:24PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > Any idea if the PPC970 bus is really hypertransport like so many people
> > sy, or something else ?
>
> I don't believe that it is HT like. From what I understand
On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 08:12:24PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> Any idea if the PPC970 bus is really hypertransport like so many people
> sy, or something else ?
I don't believe that it is HT like. From what I understand, the chip
has two separate unidirectional 32 bit busses that will be connect
On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 13:48:29 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven composed:
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 12:12:56PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Better but not quite yet, only 3 orders of magnitude
On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 13:34:06 +0100, Gabriel Paubert composed:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 12:12:56PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > that may be because of the smallish amount of RAM on this thing;
> > > interleaved i was getting pretty much
On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 12:12:56 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven composed:
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 22:26:00 +0100, Michel Lanners composed:
> > > On 22 Jan, this message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] echoed through cyberspace:
> > >
> > > >> - check your hard
On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 04:16:24PM +0100, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 01:48:29PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 12:12:56PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>
> > > > BTW, I get 45 MB/s for the buf
On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 01:48:29PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 12:12:56PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > BTW, I get 45 MB/s for the buffer-cache on my 66 MHz SDRAM.
> >
> > Looks still very low, very conservat
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 12:12:56PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > that may be because of the smallish amount of RAM on this thing;
> > > interleaved i was getting pretty much the same ratings. it
On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 12:12:56PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > that may be because of the smallish amount of RAM on this thing;
> > interleaved i was getting pretty much the same ratings. it may have to
> > do with the RAM sticks' actual ms sp
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 22:26:00 +0100, Michel Lanners composed:
> > On 22 Jan, this message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] echoed through cyberspace:
> >
> > >> - check your hard disk speed: hdparm -tT /dev/
> > >> (is non-destructive; post the result to
For what it's worth, this seller on eBay
(http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems&userid=pale-luna&include=0&since=-1&sort=3&rows=25)
is selling a couple 128MB sticks for about $30 each - might be worth
checking out. Sorry about the long link.
NRH
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 22:26:00 +0100, Michel Lanners composed:
> On 22 Jan, this message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] echoed through cyberspace:
>
> >> - check your hard disk speed: hdparm -tT /dev/
> >> (is non-destructive; post the result to compare)
> >
> > 1. Timing buffer-cache reads: 128
On 22 Jan, this message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] echoed through cyberspace:
>> - check your hard disk speed: hdparm -tT /dev/
>> (is non-destructive; post the result to compare)
>
> 1. Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 3.73 seconds = 34.32 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 22:40:22 +0100, Michel Lanners composed:
> On 21 Jan, this message from Geert Uytterhoeven echoed through cyberspace:
> > On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Ugh, I have a 200 MHz 604e and 128 MB RAM, but it takes much less time
> > (between
> > 30 and 45
20 matches
Mail list logo
