Re: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance

William Lee Irwin III (wli@holomorphy.com)
Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:45:44 -0800

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Dominik Brodowski: "[PATCH 2.5] cpufreq: move x86 configuration to "Power Management""
Previous message: Nakajima, Jun: "RE: [PATCH][2.5][RFC] Using xAPIC apic address space on !Summit"
In reply to: Mike Hayward: "Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance"
Next in thread: Mike Hayward: "Re: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance"

On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 01:30:28AM -0700, Mike Hayward wrote:
> Any ideas? Not sure I want to upgrade to the P7 architecture if this
> is right, since for me system calls are probably more important than
> raw cpu computational power.

This is the same for me. I'm extremely uninterested in the P-IV for my
own use because of this.

Bill
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Dominik Brodowski: "[PATCH 2.5] cpufreq: move x86 configuration to "Power Management""
Previous message: Nakajima, Jun: "RE: [PATCH][2.5][RFC] Using xAPIC apic address space on !Summit"
In reply to: Mike Hayward: "Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance"
Next in thread: Mike Hayward: "Re: Intel P6 vs P7 system call performance"