🚀 go-pugleaf

"Stefano Agostinelli" <agos001@pn.itnet.it> wrote:

>  Yes it is. At least the 68040 was much faster than the 486 in FP calculations.
>  (I'm talking about a per MHZ comparison). Dunno about the '060, however I

Sigh.

I said that the 68K is only comparable in terms of instructions per
clock, but that has nothing to do with whether it is actually faster.
Then you come back with "but its comparable in a per-clock comparison!"

68k is not as fast, because the x86 can run at much higher clockspeeds
than can 68k.  My point was that a "per MHz comparison" is meaningless.
It might be interesting if the 68k and x86 had exactly the same range of
clock speeds, but they do not (for 060:Pentium they don't even overlap),
so it matters little if the per-MHz speed is similar.

Also, you are missing that the FP ratio Pentium:060 is not the same as
486:040, and particularly is not the same as P6:060.

Just trust me on this one.  This is rehashed every 2 or 3 days, and the
answer is always the same: the Intel chips have higher absolute FP *and*
Int performance than 680x0.  It will also be the same answer when
someone else brings this up again in 2 or 3 days after this, and again 2
or 3 days after that.  Just watch.  In a few days someone will post "but
the 68060/50 is faster than a P133!" and it'll start all over again.

  - steve