From:	"David Jonsson" <David DOT Jonsson AT ellemtel DOT se>
To:	<pgcc AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	RE: K7 potentials
Date:	Fri, 2 Jul 1999 13:50:20 +0100
Message-ID:	<000401bec489$71489b60$41d16482@ellemtel.se>
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance:	Normal
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211
In-Reply-To:	<3.0.32.19990520004516.00aa4930@pop.xs4all.nl>
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id IAA04743
Reply-To:	pgcc AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	pgcc AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> 
> At 05:48 PM 5/19/99 -0400, Adam Schrotenboer wrote:
> >I was wondering if there is any speculation, q's, etc about what the K7
> >may be capable of.
> 
> well i don't expect too much.

Expect 10-50% more than PIII. Look at www.amd.se
 
> >For example:
> >    Will the K7 be less "register starved" than the rest of the x86
> >archictecture, or was this simply not possible while maintaining x86
> >compatibility????
> >    If it will have more registers, how much difference will this make

The only way to increase register amounts is to introduce new CPU states just like they have with PIII.

David

- Raw text -