3 ms·
New to this, but basing such calculation on purely on CPU capacity would imply a bandwidth to memory (or some cache) 64 B / inst * 2 (read and writeback) * 3
by orm 11y ago
New to this, but basing such calculation on purely on CPU capacity would imply a bandwidth to memory (or some cache)
64 B / inst * 2 (read and writeback) * 3 inst / cycle * 3 Gcycle/sec > 1000 gigabytes/sec, which is insane considering 50GB/s is the norm to RAM right now.
*edit: Haswell L1 cache seems to allow a peak bandwidth of 64 byte loads + 32 byte store per cycle, so like other comments point out, this would match the CPU capacity. On the other hand, there is also latency. But it is hard for me to tell how latency factors into this.
Could someone explain how they would decide whether copying packets is cheap or not?
- jsprogrammer 11y ago>Could someone explain how they would decide whether copying packets is cheap or not? Run two machines. One runs packet copying software, the other runs non packet copying software. Both run on the same data set. Record the amount of electricity used. Multiply the numbers by the marginal electricity cost and compare. If the number produced by the packet copying machine is not significantly different from the machine that didn't copy packets, copying packets is cheap.