> 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