delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
From: | "David Jonsson" <David DOT Jonsson AT ellemtel DOT se> |
To: | <pgcc AT delorie DOT com> |
Subject: | RE: K7 potentials |
Date: | Fri, 2 Jul 1999 13:50:20 +0100 |
Message-ID: | <000401bec489$71489b60$41d16482@ellemtel.se> |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
X-Priority: | 3 (Normal) |
X-MSMail-Priority: | Normal |
X-Mailer: | Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 |
Importance: | Normal |
X-MimeOLE: | Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 |
In-Reply-To: | <3.0.32.19990520004516.00aa4930@pop.xs4all.nl> |
X-MIME-Autoconverted: | from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id IAA04743 |
Reply-To: | pgcc AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | pgcc AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
> > At 05:48 PM 5/19/99 -0400, Adam Schrotenboer wrote: > >I was wondering if there is any speculation, q's, etc about what the K7 > >may be capable of. > > well i don't expect too much. Expect 10-50% more than PIII. Look at www.amd.se > >For example: > > Will the K7 be less "register starved" than the rest of the x86 > >archictecture, or was this simply not possible while maintaining x86 > >compatibility???? > > If it will have more registers, how much difference will this make The only way to increase register amounts is to introduce new CPU states just like they have with PIII. David
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright � 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |