Subject: Re: Pentium Pro 200 vs. Pentium 200

From: "Slawomir Z. Janicki" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 01:01:18 -0600

Also, try to get the chip that has 512 kB cache. They are more expensive,   
but the cache will make quite a difference with a 32-bit OS. For the same   
reason, stay away from the new 233MHz PPro (Klamath). The on-chip cache   
has been dropped! Stay with the 200MHz PPro.

Slawek Janicki
[email-masked]

P.S. Has anybody tried the new Cheetah drives from Seagate? Are they any   
better than the Barracudas?

----------
From:  chemistry-request
Sent:  Wednesday, February 19, 1997 1:54 PM
To:  chemistry
Subject:  CCL:Pentium Pro 200 vs. Pentium 200

The Pentium Pro series of CPU's executes floating point instructions
more efficiently (in fewer clock cycles) than the corresponding speed
Pentium.  The Pro vs. regular Pentium difference is greater with
floating point than integer or compare instructions.  If you are
looking to buy a computer for ab intio QM calculations, get a Pentium
Pro.  I believe that running the Linux version of Gaussian will give
you the best throughput.  Getting an Ultra-Wide SCSI disk will help
also.  Some types of post-SCF calculations are heavily I/O bound.

---

From: Jie Yuan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 07:24:04 -0500 (EST)

> has been dropped! Stay with the 200MHz PPro.

I think Intel will add cache in the ppro chip later this year.  So, there
is still hope, if you can wait ... :-) 

Jie
-- Jie Yuan, PhD - U. of Cincinnati - Dept. of Pharmacology & C.B. --
== POBox 670575, Cin., OH 45267-0575 = 513-558-2352 = x-1169 (fax) ==
== www.uc.edu/~yuanj = [email-masked] = using Pine (Irix5.3)      ==
== PGP key: finger -l [email-masked]                      ==

---

From: Gregory Galperin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 09:27:03 -0500 (EST)

> but the cache will make quite a difference with a 32-bit OS. For the same   

Actually, if you're doing computation on large data sets (say with
Gaussian), the size of that L2 cache is unlikely to make much of a
difference in the speed of your computation.  You'd get a speedup if
you're doing something that fits into 512K but doesn't fit into 256K.
In computation on large data sets, it won't even fit into 512K.  

Use the $500 you save for getting another 64M of RAM; that'll probably
help you more.

--Greg Galperin