Question about CPU caches and D context pointers

[Etienne]

On 2014-02-18 1:13 PM, "Casper Færgemand" <shorttail at hotmail.com>" wrote:
> On Tuesday, 18 February 2014 at 08:11:04 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> I tested some prime sieves both in C++ and D. They worked fastest with
> dynamic arrays with a size matching the L1 cache. I presume the
> instructions are located elsewhere in the CPU.

Does that mean ubyte[] = new ubyte[4092] is more likely to end up in the 
CPU cache than ubyte[4092] or the inverse ?