533 MHz 164SX vs 500a/u

533 MHz 164SX vs 500a/u

Post by K. Aru » Sun, 26 May 2002 02:53:59



Hello,

        Just out of curiousity, how does a 533MHz 164SX fare against a
PWS 500a/u ? There isn't much information by way of benchmarks out there.

                                                -arun

 
 
 

533 MHz 164SX vs 500a/u

Post by Falk Hueffne » Sun, 26 May 2002 03:05:06



>    Just out of curiousity, how does a 533MHz 164SX fare against a
> PWS 500a/u ? There isn't much information by way of benchmarks out
> there.

The major difference is that the SX164 lacks a L2 cache, so it will be
slower on some cache intensive operations. OTOH, it has the MVI
instruction extension, but that will only help with very few
applications, mainly video codecs.

--
        Falk

 
 
 

533 MHz 164SX vs 500a/u

Post by Christian Weisgerb » Mon, 27 May 2002 00:31:33



> >       Just out of curiousity, how does a 533MHz 164SX fare against a
> > PWS 500a/u ? There isn't much information by way of benchmarks out
> > there.

> The major difference is that the SX164 lacks a L2 cache, so it will be
> slower on some cache intensive operations.

The picture is more complicated:

             |  PC164SX  |  PWS500a(u)
    ---------+-----------+-------------
    CPU      |  21164PC  |  21164A
    Dcache   |    8K     |    8K
    Icache   |   16K     |    8K
    Scache   |     -     |   96K
    ---------+-----------+-------------
    Bcache   |    1M     |  0/2/4M

The 21164A in the PWS has more on-chip cache.  However, all PC164SX
boards have 1MB external cache, whereas external cache is optional
for the PWS.  So expect to see different results depending on the
memory usage of your application and the actually installed L3 cache
in the PWS.

--

 
 
 

533 MHz 164SX vs 500a/u

Post by Jafir Elkur » Mon, 27 May 2002 04:27:27


My 164LX has 4MB bcache.



> > > Just out of curiousity, how does a 533MHz 164SX fare against a
> > > PWS 500a/u ? There isn't much information by way of benchmarks out
> > > there.

> > The major difference is that the SX164 lacks a L2 cache, so it will be
> > slower on some cache intensive operations.

> The picture is more complicated:

>              |  PC164SX  |  PWS500a(u)
>     ---------+-----------+-------------
>     CPU      |  21164PC  |  21164A
>     Dcache   |    8K     |    8K
>     Icache   |   16K     |    8K
>     Scache   |     -     |   96K
>     ---------+-----------+-------------
>     Bcache   |    1M     |  0/2/4M

> The 21164A in the PWS has more on-chip cache.  However, all PC164SX
> boards have 1MB external cache, whereas external cache is optional
> for the PWS.  So expect to see different results depending on the
> memory usage of your application and the actually installed L3 cache
> in the PWS.

> --


 
 
 

533 MHz 164SX vs 500a/u

Post by Dennis Grevenstei » Sat, 01 Jun 2002 07:19:31



> My 164LX has 4MB bcache.

2MB on some boards. These were mainly sold for running NT.

Dennis

--
OpenVMS is a truly GREAT operating system. The best thing to come along
since the invention of toilet paper. Both of these inventions have made
tremendous improvements in the human condition.
                                           Joe Huber in comp.os.vms

 
 
 

533 MHz 164SX vs 500a/u

Post by Matt Fitzgeral » Fri, 21 Jun 2002 09:13:30


http://www.cs.unr.edu/~ekkasit/arch/survey.doc

A good survey on Alpha architectures.

-Matt


> My 164LX has 4MB bcache.




> > > > Just out of curiousity, how does a 533MHz 164SX fare against a
> > > > PWS 500a/u ? There isn't much information by way of benchmarks out
> > > > there.

> > > The major difference is that the SX164 lacks a L2 cache, so it will be
> > > slower on some cache intensive operations.

> > The picture is more complicated:

> >              |  PC164SX  |  PWS500a(u)
> >     ---------+-----------+-------------
> >     CPU      |  21164PC  |  21164A
> >     Dcache   |    8K     |    8K
> >     Icache   |   16K     |    8K
> >     Scache   |     -     |   96K
> >     ---------+-----------+-------------
> >     Bcache   |    1M     |  0/2/4M

> > The 21164A in the PWS has more on-chip cache.  However, all PC164SX
> > boards have 1MB external cache, whereas external cache is optional
> > for the PWS.  So expect to see different results depending on the
> > memory usage of your application and the actually installed L3 cache
> > in the PWS.

> > --


 
 
 

533 MHz 164SX vs 500a/u

Post by M?ns Rullg? » Fri, 21 Jun 2002 16:30:05



> http://www.cs.unr.edu/~ekkasit/arch/survey.doc

> A good survey on Alpha architectures.

Yes, except for the file format and the fact that the numbers are
a bit outdated.

--
M?ns Rullg?rd