[RC5] core questions

Matthew Adkins omnicron at ameritech.net
Tue Mar 12 20:59:22 EST 2002


I think you are confusing MMX with 3dNow!.  My AMD K6 166, 200 and 233
chips were all MMX. They licensed it from Intel I believe. Then they
came out with 3DNow which added extensions to make the chip better at 3D
video and audio than a Pentium chip.

According to AMD:

Q: How are MMXT and 3DNow!T technology different?
 
A: MMXT technology was developed to improve the integer-intensive
operations used in 3D rendering at the back end of the graphics
pipeline. However, by the time MMX technology reached the market, 3D
graphics accelerator performance had outpaced most of what MMX could do.
While MMX technology can enhance integer-intensive applications, today's
state-of-the-art graphics accelerators provide an optimal performance
boost for 3D rendering. 3DNow!T technology complements and enhances the
performance of these accelerator products by speeding up the
floating-point-intensive, front-end stages of the graphics pipeline. 


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rc5 at lists.distributed.net
[mailto:owner-rc5 at lists.distributed.net] On Behalf Of blitz
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 7:03 PM
To: rc5 at lists.distributed.net
Subject: Re: [RC5] core questions


Interesting...I'm "assuming" AMD did add the necessary MMX sort of 
instruction set by the time things got to say 233 mhz or so....I recall 
they called it something different than MMX, but it was the same thing.
The 
box I'm on rite now, is a 233 amd, and I know it supports the mmx stuff.
So despite mmx being a dud  for video, it makes Dnet cores run 
better...great...
I've always liked the AMD chips because of their risc architecture, 
something I got a bit familiar with when I had a SGI Indy. (wish I still

had it..heh)



At 14:45 3/12/02 -0500, you wrote:

>I don't know that the turning of the crunchometere had anything to do 
>with speed.  But MMX instructions do make a big difference.  Also, 
>certain x86 chips didn't have instructions in hardware to do things 
>that we needed to do.  Early AMDs didn't have a rotate instruction that

>we needed to do, but Intel chips did, they were much faster than AMD 
>chips.  MMX is just integer math handler.
>
>
>
>
>On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, blitz wrote:
>
> > I just did a processor changeout in a linux box on my lan. I had an 
> > old cyrix 166 mhz clone chip and replaced it with a pentium P5mmx at

> > the same speed. (running Mandrake Linux 8.0 w/64mb memory) I see the

> > core changed, and the speed of processing went way up in comparison 
> > to the old chip. The core running now is a "jasonp" I believe..
> >
> > Questions: Is there actually THAT much improvement in handling the 
> > RC5
> task
> > I should be seeing the little indicator turning that much faster?
> >
> > and, does the mmx functions actually contribute something to the
> processing
> > speed? I always thought they had something to do with video 
> > processing,
> not
> > raw processing power.
> >
> > In any case, I want to thank "jasonp" for a core thats visibly more 
> > powerful than the old cyrix one, amazing what just a little tweaking
> can do huh?
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to 
> > majordomo at lists.distributed.net rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 
> > with rc5-digest
> >
> >
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to 
>majordomo at lists.distributed.net rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with

>rc5-digest

--
To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to
majordomo at lists.distributed.net rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with
rc5-digest


--
To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest



More information about the rc5 mailing list