David Kanter (dkanter@realworldtech.com) on 11/9/07 wrote:

[snip]
>So it's not actually the first, I wrote up an article on Dempsey, Woodcrest, Clovertown and now Harpertown.
>

You're right. I really forgot about these ones through I read them in the past, but it just confirms that I consider RWT to be very much about technology.

[snip]
>So the issue isn't the multipliers, it's the clock speed relative to memory.
>

Right, multiplier is just one of "coefficients". I should state it more precisely.

>>3. As I'm not entirely sure how snoop filters are >implemented - does 24MB snoop
>>filter means it is capable of work with 24MB of L2 cache >total or it actually has
>>a 24MB buffer inside? (btw: it would be also nice to know >what is a real-world impact
>>of four affinity groups in snoop filter)
>
>It means that the snoop filter can index 24MB of cache data. Basically the snoop
>filter replicated the tags of all the L2 caches, with status information (MESI).
>
>The real world impact is that it reduces the number of snoops. When you miss in
>cache, you have to snoop all other caches in the system to see if they have the data.
>
>The snoop filter acts as a directory for the caches in the system...one of my previous
>articles on Blackford had more detail:
>
>http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT110805135916&p=3
>

Thank You for explanation and link. However I admit that I hoped for more "measurable" information (like in DB server workloads it can reduce FSB traffic by x%)

>Cheers,
>
>
>David

Best regards,
Marcin