[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: computer graphic card memory



PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links


Exactly so.If one looks at the spec. for a celeron 
based machine(even from a first tier assembler) the spec is a compromise on all 
fronts. 
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr 
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  <DIV 
  style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From: 
  Free 
  To: <A title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 5:11 
  PM
  Subject: Re: computer graphic card 
  memory
  
  Lionel,
   
  I am a little out of date, so I could stnad 
  corrected on recent events.  A little history: Intel was caught off-guard 
  with the sub-$1000 phenomenon (time flies, this must have been 3-4 years ago!) 
  and moved quickly to counter AMD in this space.  The best they could do 
  to save money on short notice was to come up with a no-cache version, code 
  named Covington.   At this time, the PII had 512K L2 cache on a 
  separate die packaged in the Slot-1 form factor, which was very expensive to 
  produce.   Covington was the first Celeron, but the Mendocino 
  version was in the works as the 2nd generation; this had an integrated on-die 
  cache, 128K as I recall.  So, from about 6 months after its initial 
  introduction, Celeron has had L2 cache.  Pentium was moving to a 100MHz 
  front side bus and Celeron was still 66MHz, so there was another 
  difference.  Because of the rush, Celerons were first offered as a funky 
  open SEPP cartrudge form; Mendocino evolved to offer a cost-reduced PPGA 
  cartridge.
   
  There was a point in time, ca. 1999, when the L2 
  caceh on Celeron was actually faster than Pentium.  Because of the 
  quicker move to on-die cache, Celeron first has full speed cache.  The 
  larger cache size caused on-die cache to be later for Pentium.  Pentium 
  had a separate cache that could only be driven at 1/2 the back-side bus 
  speed.
   
  Except for some highly integrated (e.g. onboard 
  graphics that I am not sure ever made it to market) chips, Celeron has 
  traditionally used the same processor technology as Pentium.  One 
  way we know the Celeron has changed considerably since introduction is the 
  speeds now available. The top Celeron is now 900MHz with a 100MHz front 
  side bus.  It had to undergo basic architectural changes to quadruple its 
  speed.  
   
  Again, I am not necessarily current, but I think 
  the difference between Celeron and PIII is the smaller 128k L2 cache and 
  100MHz FSB vs. 133.  The P4 is a different architecture altogether, with 
  1.8GHz speeds, 400MHz FSB, etc.  A not insignificant difference is in 
  your question: "...because the Celeron is used on cheaper computers 
  ...".  This is a marketing, not a technical, issue, but the fact is that 
  the OEM's will put lower performing components around a Celeron for a cheaper 
  total system.
   
  That's all I know!
   
  <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr 
  style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    <DIV 
    style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From: 
    Lionel 
    Issen 
    To: <A title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
    href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
    Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 6:47 
    AM
    Subject: Re: computer graphic card 
    memory
    
    Free:
    Thanks for bringing me up to date on the 
    Celeron. Can you tell me what the intrinsic differences are between the 
    Celeron and other microprocessors. I assumed that because the Celeron is 
    used on cheaper computers that it hadn't been changed.
    Lionel Issen<A 
    href="mailto:lissen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>lissen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr 
    style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
      ----- Original Message ----- 
      <DIV 
      style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From: 
      Free 
      
      To: <A title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
      href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
      Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 9:19 
      PM
      Subject: Re: computer graphic card 
      memory
      
      The original Celeron (2-3 years ago) had no 
      L2 cache, but 2nd generation and above do have an integrated L2 
      cache.
      <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr 
      style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
        ----- Original Message ----- 
        <DIV 
        style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From: 
        <A title=lissen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
        href="mailto:lissen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>Lionel Issen 
        To: <A 
        title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
        href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
        Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 7:26 
        PM
        Subject: Re: computer graphic card 
        memory
        
        Dave D.
        You are correct about the Celeron it has no 
        cache. As a general rule, when I buy a new computer, I want the hardware 
        not to be integrated.  Its cheaper and easier to make changes and 
        repairs.
        Lionel Issen<A 
        href="mailto:lissen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>lissen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr 
        style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
          ----- Original Message ----- 
          <DIV 
          style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From: 
          David 
          DeFina 
          To: <A 
          title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
          href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
          
          Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 
          10:43 AM
          Subject: RE: computer graphic 
          card memory
          
          
          <FONT face=Arial 
          color=navy size=2><SPAN 
          style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt">My 
          two cents is don&#8217;t purchase a computer with an integrated graphics 
          card, especially with 4mb ram.  
          That&#8217;s like buying a car with a governor that keeps it below 
          45mph.  The Cache is 
          different from the Ram memory.  
          It resides near the processor and offloads tasks to free up the 
          processor and allows faster throughput.<SPAN 
          style="mso-spacerun: yes">  256K is what comes with a 
          Celeron chip and the Pentium usually has 512K.<SPAN 
          style="mso-spacerun: yes">  Don&#8217;t torture yourself with 
          that computer.  Just my 
          opinion.  Dave 
          D.
          <FONT face=Tahoma 
          color=black size=2><SPAN 
          style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">-----Original 
          Message-----From: 
          owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
          [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]<SPAN 
          style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">On Behalf Of 
          MayTseshuyan1@xxxxxxx<SPAN 
          style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent: Aug 10, 2001 6:21 
          PMTo: 
          metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<SPAN 
          style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject: computer graphic card 
          memory
          <FONT 
          face="Times New Roman" size=3> 
          <FONT face=Arial 
          color=black size=3><SPAN 
          style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">I am looking 
          at new computer  and also thinking of buying a good charting 
          program. Dell told me  this new computer I am 
          thinking of purchasing has a graphic card that is 'integrated', 
          meaning unremovable, and also 4mb ram only.   He 
          suggested I check first to see if it may not be strong enough for 
          my intended charting software program. He also mentioned 
          the cache is 256mb , and I read a good charting program needs to 
          work on 512mb cache.    I am thinking of putting 256x2 
          mb ram onto this new computer. 
                Is Cache & Ram 2 different 
          kinds of memories?  I thought I know I lot, but now I really 
          think I know nothing...:-( TYIA for any guidances.... 
          Have a nice weekend, all of you :-)<FONT 
          color=black><SPAN 
          style="COLOR: black; mso-color-alt: windowtext">