well i'm programing a software for windows CE 5.0 that receive data via USB 2.0 and show them as pixel on screen, that is cpu bound but the system is suppose to only run this program. i'm going to buy a SBC motherboard with this cpu: onboard ULV C-M 1GHz/0kB CPU
my question is if i use that SBC is it possible that having 0kb cpu cache affect the performance of my program?
and if so, is it really a big deal that make me to get a cpu with higher cache?
thanks ^^
2007-01-17 06:17:43 · 3 answers · asked by farshid hss 2 in Computers & Internet ➔ Hardware ➔ Other - Hardware
Your question wasn't exactly clear: are you WRITING this program, or attempting to configure it?
If you're writing it:
It depends on how you're structuring your logic. If the entire ap is a series of FIFO and GoTo (i.e. whole thing starts at the top, runs to the bottom, doesn't reference internally defined functions or inherit from function libraries), cache isn't a big deal. If it's even a TINY bit object-oriented, a 0kb cache is going to make execution painful.
Honestly, I'm a bit impressed that you even managed to find a 0-cache system.
Edit: CPU cache isn't the only place to store variables... it's just by far and away the best.
2007-01-17 06:26:00 · answer #1 · answered by Benjamin C 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If the processor checks the cache for variables to load into registers, then having no cache will be an extreme performance hit because every attempt to check the cache will be a cache miss.
It's a big deal if the response time of the program gets bad. If it works in a timely manner, you have nothing to worry about.
2007-01-17 06:23:25 · answer #2 · answered by Pfo 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes a cpu with no cache at all is really bad.
I had actually bought an original Celeron 300 that had no L2 cache , biggest mistake of my life.
It was slower than a sloth.
2007-01-17 06:24:39 · answer #3 · answered by Venom 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋