|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
> It just seems slightly crazy having a CPU that's hundreds of times faster
> than RAM, and using caching is a trick to try to hide this inescapable
> fact.
It's not crazy, it's a clever idea to get more performance for less money.
> I wonder... if money was no object, *could* you actually have a 1GB L1
> cache?? Or is it actually not possible for some other reason?
I'm no expert, but the length of the tracks from the farthest away bit of L1
cache to the CPU might be a problem.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |