I already posted this question on Microsoft's MSDN forum, and they recommended coming here.
I'm querying the Win32_CacheMemory class to enumerate my CPU cache. I'm getting a value of 9 back for Associativity. All online documentation I can find only lists values 1-8.
I'm trying to find info on full set ofpossible values.
My system:
Intel Core i5-2540M CPU @ 2.60 GHz
Windows 7 Pro 64-bit
連結已複製
[SergeyK]That is really strange that nobody from Microsoft couldn't answer your question...
I'm querying the Win32_CacheMemory class to enumerate my CPU cache...
In what WMI namespace is it?
Best regards,
Sergey
I'm trying to find info on full set ofpossible values...
Please take a look at:
1. Intel Software Developer's Manual - Instruction Set Reference (A-M) Vol 2A
Table 3-20
A. It looks like9 is a'Fully Associative' and Intel coded it with a value 0FH. By some reason Microsoft's
WMI uses the value 9 instead.
B.Could itbe'Reserved'?
2. CPUID instruction
EAX = 4
EBX = Bits 31-22W - Ways of Associativity
>>In what WMI namespace is it?
I figured it out: it is the classin CIMV2 namespace.
I'm trying to find info on full set ofpossible values...
Please take a look at:
1. Intel Software Developer's Manual - Instruction Set Reference (A-M) Vol 2A
You can find lots of Intel manuals here:
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/architectures-software-developer-manuals.html?wapkw=Manuals
There does not appear to be an equivalency between what Intel returns (CPUID instruction) and what WMI returns.
WMI just returnsthe ordinal numberof the associativity type within an enumeration.
| CPUID | WMI |
| 00H - Disabled 01H - Direct mapped 02H - 2-way 04H - 4-way 06H - 8-way 08H - 16-way 0FH - Fully associative | 1 - Other 2 - Unknown 3 - Direct Mapped 4 - 2-way Set-Associative 5 - 4-way Set-Associative 6 - Fully Associative 7 - 8-way Set Associative 8 - 16-way Set-Associative |
A. It looks like9 is a'Fully Associative' and Intel coded it with a value 0FH. By some reason Microsoft's
WMI uses the value 9 instead.
...
Not confirmed. Please see Post #5.