> That begs the question: Would we be better off if CPU clock speeds were set such that the memory could keep up again
Memory latency is at best about 10 ns. I don't think a 100 MHz CPU would better in any way than what we have now. Well, except power requirements would sure be very low.
Memory latency is at best about 10 ns. I don't think a 100 MHz CPU would better in any way than what we have now. Well, except power requirements would sure be very low.