Transaction

5e46534a0589c401ef91183f34c4e9abaab562e49b51aeca6c8defdcfb5d53a5
Timestamp (utc)
2024-03-27 16:31:10
Fee Paid
0.00000008 BSV
(
0.00735162 BSV
-
0.00735154 BSV
)
Fee Rate
10.59 sat/KB
Version
1
Confirmations
93,350
Size Stats
755 B

2 Outputs

Total Output:
0.00735154 BSV
  • j"1LAnZuoQdcKCkpDBKQMCgziGMoPC4VQUckM÷<div class="post"><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=820.msg9457#msg9457">Quote from: knightmb on August 15, 2010, 05:02:16 PM</a></div><div class="quote">If I didn't know better, I would say the key is the CPU cache size. Seems all the CPU that run slower have 2 MB or less onboard cache, where as the Core i5 starts with at least 3MB of onboard CPU cache.<br/></div><br/>That's unlikely. The loop accesses 432 bytes of data. That should fit in most caches.</div> text/html
    https://whatsonchain.com/tx/5e46534a0589c401ef91183f34c4e9abaab562e49b51aeca6c8defdcfb5d53a5