Thread View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer
2 messages
2 total messages
Started by Ralf.Brown
Wed, 14 Mar 1990 11:35
Re: How is a 68000 as fast as an 80386??
Author: Ralf.Brown
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 1990 11:35
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 1990 11:35
43 lines
3123 bytes
3123 bytes
In article <908@tijc02.UUCP>, rdo031@tijc02.UUCP (Rick Odle ) wrote:
}From article <3666@plains.UUCP>, by harlow@plains.UUCP (Jay B. Harlow):
}> In article <505@bilver.UUCP> alex@bilver.UUCP (Alex Matulich) writes:
}>>Naturally, I wanted more speed, so I ported the program to an AT&T 386WGS
}>>at work, which is a 25 MHz 80386 IBM compatible. I compiled it using
}>>Turbo C 2.0, large memory model. Then I watched in chagrined disbelief as
}>>that number-crunching section still took about a minute to execute --
}>>actually a few seconds longer than my Amiga. All source code was the same!
}>>
}>>5) I know the 80386 has special modes of operation, incompatible with
}>> previous chips, that allow it to run at its full potential. Is this
}>> the reason my program isn't running at its rightful speed? Are these
}> Yes partly, 1) 32-bit inst in real mode 2) 32-bit Protected mode
}>> special modes accessible when using DOS? If so, how?
}>
}> Alex,
}> the reason your program ran 'slow' on the 386 is because you compiled it
}> for a 286 (at best) LARGE model, a large model on a x86 means all addresses
}> have segment offset, haveing the x86 load segments is very 'expensive'
}
}The only fair test here is to do the test with large model. While it
}is true that the 80x86 processors will let you execute code in a small
}model architecture, this is only applicable to fairly small applications
}( I know this is relatively speaking, and that 10 years ago 64k of code
}was a fairly large application). The 680x0 family architecture ALWAYS
}fetches long word addresses (32 bits), so the most fair comparision
}is the x86 large model.
Ahem, since we're talking about a 386, the only fair comparison is to 386
small model, which is one 4 gigabyte code segment and another 4 gigabyte
segment for data/stack/heap. Which 680x0 addresses 8 gigs at once?
}BTW, this very feature (large linear address space) on the 68k family is
}what makes it a somewhat more desirable processor to program on (no
Gee, 4 gigabytes per segment looks pretty large and linear to me....
--
UUCP: {ucbvax,harvard}!cs.cmu.edu!ralf -=- 412-268-3053 (school) -=- FAX: ask
ARPA: ralf@cs.cmu.edu BIT: ralf%cs.cmu.edu@CMUCCVMA FIDO: Ralf Brown 1:129/46
"How to Prove It" by Dana Angluin Disclaimer? I claimed something?
16. proof by cosmology:
The negation of the proposition is unimaginable or meaningless. Popular
for proofs of the existence of God.
Re: How is a 68000 as fast as an 80386??
Author: Kevin D. Quitt
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 1990 19:23
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 1990 19:23
22 lines
1294 bytes
1294 bytes
In article <25fe3a99@ralf> Ralf.Brown@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU writes:
>[...] Which 680x0 addresses 8 gigs at once?
The 68020, 68030, and 68040 can each address 8 different 4GB memory
spaces, including priveleged vs non-privileged, and instruction vs data.
>Gee, 4 gigabytes per segment looks pretty large and linear to me....
It does to me too. Unfortunately, almost nobody ever gets to use
the 386 that way. We're all stuck with real mode.
kdq
--
Kevin D. Quitt Manager, Software Development
DeMott Electronics Co. VOICE (818) 988-4975
14707 Keswick St. FAX (818) 997-1190
Van Nuys, CA 91405-1266 MODEM (818) 997-4496 Telebit PEP last
34 12 N 118 27 W srhqla!demott!kdq kdq@demott.com
"Next time, Jack, write a God-damned memo!" - Jack Ryan - Hunt for Red Oct.
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads