Benefits of L3 cache size on MDD.

[MacTron]

I'd unsuccessfully tried to find a prove that 2Mb of L2 is better than 1Mb of L2 on the MDD, and I think I have found it...  by chance.
My recent setup of a RAID0 SSD's on a 64bits SATA controler was to try to put NI DFD (Direct from Disk)  to properly work.
I've achieved a Max transfer rate of 190 MB/s,but DFD worked as bad as usually.
This test was done in a MDD 1.5Ghz single (1.25 overclocked) with 1Mb L3.

Further test, evidence a CPU speed problem. DFD besides hard HD work, seems to implies a 25-50% more of compute power.

I've put the RAID and the SATA card into a more speedier Sawtoth [email protected] Ghz, but without achieve any enhacement.

The surprise come when I put the SSD RAID and the SATA card into a [email protected] (1.42 overclocked) and work noticeably better than in the other two systems even working in single CPU mode.

And what is the main difference between those three systems? ...the 2Mb of L3 in to the 1.66!!

[supernova777]

interesting. yes Diehard has engrained it into my brain the importance of the L3 cache..
i was looking to get myself a xeon processor that has 12mb of L3 cache
my current q6600 on my intel pc has 8mb and its always been a great cpu!
this is why im happy to have my quicksilver 933
it makes u wonder why 4 out of 5 machines that feature this 2mb L3 cache are quicksilver models
and only one MDD model has it.. the dual 1.25 2002 MDD

[MacTron]

The FW800 1.42 also have 2Mb of L2. Its CPU module can be used on FW400 MDD.
And the Xserve G4 CPU can be used on FW400 MDD also.



I'd like to see this running Mac OS 9
Take a look at PCI specs...

http://support.apple.com/kb/sp102

[supernova777]

The FW800 1.42 also have 2Mb of L2. Its CPU module can be used on FW400 MDD.
And the Xserve G4 CPU can be used on FW400 MDD also.

I'd like to see this running Mac OS 9
Take a look at PCI specs...

http://support.apple.com/kb/sp102

hmm funny u mention this because i was just looking at this for the first time just the other day on everymac.com
i got excited when i saw this 1.33ghz xserve g4.. but then i realized "X" means OSX only
but it never ocurred to me to put this g4 cpu into another g4!

maybe its possible to get a good deal on old forgotten "X" server
and yes this 66mhz slot speed would make for a better file server if using the xserve hardware
would be cool to see a mac rom hack to make it boot 9..
we need to find some japenese mac fans who can hack this
lol

[Protools5LEGuy]

Look at the cpu from Ghz Dual QS'02.
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_1ghz_dp_qs.html
Is the small brother or 1.25 Dual and 1.42 Dual
Best cpu for Digital Audio Power Macs...

[supernova777]

Look at the cpu from Ghz Dual QS'02.
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_1ghz_dp_qs.html
Is the small brother or 1.25 Dual and 1.42 Dual
Best cpu for Digital Audio Power Macs...

for those people who find these macs to be "The most beautiful" right jorge?   
but remember the 3rd party chips!

all list:
http://www.everymac.com/upgrade_cards/by_processor/powerpc7400.html

models above dual 1ghz:

http://www.everymac.com/upgrade_cards/gigadesigns/g_celerator/g_celerator_g4_1.8d_agp_7a.html


http://www.everymac.com/upgrade_cards/gigadesigns/g_celerator/g_celerator_g4_1.3_agp_133.html


http://www.everymac.com/upgrade_cards/gigadesigns/g_celerator/g_celerator_g4_1.2_agp_133.html


http://www.everymac.com/upgrade_cards/sonnettech/encore_g4/encore_st_g4_duet_1.3.html


http://www.everymac.com/upgrade_cards/fastmac/g4_agp/g4_agp_1.44.html
http://fastmac.com/agpfaqs.php

You say that your 1.5GHz processor is faster than the competitions' 1.8GHz. How can that be?
    The competitions' 1.8GHz and 2.0GHz Upgrades have NO L3 Cache. All of our upgrades have 2MB of High Speed L3 Cache. This difference alone leads to 15%-18% increase in real world processor speed because the computer doesn't have to go down to the hard drive as often for repeatedly used instructions.

    Why don't they include L3 cache? Cost. It's like building a race car, but being too cheap to buy tires. It just doesn't run as fast.

    Also our board design runs cooler and more efficiently. Take a a close look at other upgrades and you'll see much larger, heat producing parts. You won't see those on a FastMac Upgrade. Even the newest designs of our competitors don't meet our standards. We use better, newer, more advanced technology. Why?

    Because heat causes friction. Friction slows the flow of data.

    That's how our 1.5GHz Upgrade is FASTER than the other guy's 1.8GHz. -- http://fastmac.com/agpfaqs.php

http://www.everymac.com/upgrade_cards/powerlogix/powerforce_g4_100/powerforce_g4_100_1.4_dual.html


according to the documentation on everymac, the sonnet duet is compatible with mdd aswell??
i thought pretty much 100% of these cards were quicksilver/da/sawtooh (agp non-mdd macs) only

[MacTron]

according to the documentation on everymac, the sonnet duet is compatible with mdd aswell??

And you still trust this website... LOL

i thought pretty much 100% of these cards were quicksilver/da/sawtooh (agp non-mdd macs) only

Yes, this is how it is.

... And don't you forget the Sonnet Encore G4 7448 2.0 gGhz

[DieHard]

Note that the Dual G4/1.4GHz is faster than the Dual G4/1.8GHz when running Photoshop MP actions and all four 3D Game tests. That's because the Dual G4/1.4GHz Power Mac has 2MB of L3 cache per processor. The Dual 1.8 only has 512K L2 cache per processor.

Check out the Entire Article.. It hase some awesome benchmarks

http://www.barefeats.com/g4up.html

CASE TWO: If you sell your QuickSilver on eBay for $700

Yeah... Now we are talking $45 to $75 (plus shipping)

[supernova777]

  referencing only the sonnet cpu upgrades?



compare the sonnet 1ghz with 2mb L3 to the stock

the 5 *STOCK* models that feature the 256k on chip L2/2mb backside L3 cache are:
1.25 DP MDD, 1.0 DP QS 2002, 800mhz DP QS, 933mhz QS, 867mhz QS
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_1.25_dp_mdd.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_1ghz_dp_qs.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_800_dp_qs.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_933_qs.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g4/specs/powermac_g4_867_qs.html

+ these 1.0, 1.2, + 1.4 "encore ST" single cpu upgradses


that makes 8 different cpus that have 2mb l3 cache

[DieHard]

Thanks for the chart Chris, I never realized they removed most of the cache on the faster models of the singles... damn, I was looking for the 1.8 single on the Web... forget it now

[supernova777]

no problem thats what im good for.. attaching the same antiquated info to posts untill the info gets battered into my own and the general publics conciousness;d heheheh

offtopic but i wonder if anyone ever overclocked the dual processor mystic/gigabits to 133mhz bus speed
i dont remember talking about this before but its possible we might have;D and i forget

[MacTron]

Thanks for the chart Chris, I never realized they removed most of the cache on the faster models of the singles... damn, I was looking for the 1.8 single on the Web... forget it now

The models over the 1.4 Ghz are 7447 not 7457 (or 7455)
The second 4 means no L3 interface, you know.

The L3 presence is very important. Even the 7448 with 1MB of L2 at CPU speed hardly match the 7455 with 256 L2 and 1 or 2Mb of L3 scheme...
But I  couldn't measure any improvement of 1 MB over 2 MB of L3 cache. Even with the exact same configuration except L3 amount: 7455 [email protected] 1MB L2 against 7455 [email protected] 2MB L2

offtopic but i wonder if anyone ever overclocked the dual processor mystic/gigabits to 133mhz bus speed
i dont remember talking about this before but its possible we might have;D and i forget

I've done in a Sawtooth. It's really easy. In the Mystic/GigabitEthernet it will be the same procedure, I think ...
In the Sawtooth the 133 Bus speed caused weird video related problems, mainly OpenGL related ¿?

[DieHard]

The models over the 1.4 Ghz are 7447 not 7457 (or 7455)
The second 4 means no L3 interface, you know.

No, I did not Know...  thanks for waiting 2 years to mention it   LOL

[IIO]

"more cache" should also be interesting for fully altivec optimized processes such as cinema 4d or motu altiverb.