Article View: comp.sys.intel
Article #1246Re: 486 vs. Mac Benchmarks
From: Tim Olson
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:03
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:03
16 lines
1265 bytes
1265 bytes
In article <BzFoLA.LB1@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, rvenkate@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu
(Ravikuma Venkateswar) wrote:
> But wasn't the 68040-33 clock doubled? (i.e. didn't it run internally
> at 66 MHz) Which would mean that the 68040-33 should be compared to the
> 80486DX2-66 . Which means that the Intel processor is still faster at the
> same clock speed.
No, the 68040 is not "clock doubled", at least in the way that is meant
with the 486DX2. In going from the 68030 to the 68040, the input clock
changed from a 2x clock to a 1x clock, but the bus still runs at the same
speed as the processor.
-- Tim Olson
Apple Computer Inc. / Somerset
(tim@apple.com)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<tim-181292090140@129.38.222.43>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!apple!NewsWatcher!userReferences:
<torrie.724148637@Xenon.Stanford.EDU> <1gdipoINN749@rave.larc.nasa.gov> <BzF5MF.2Lv@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> <1992Dec17.223358.12395@cs.brown.edu> <BzFoLA.LB1@news.cso.uiuc.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!apple!NewsWatcher!user From: tim@apple.com (Tim Olson) Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel Subject: Re: 486 vs. Mac Benchmarks Message-ID: <tim-181292090140@129.38.222.43> Date: 18 Dec 92 15:03:50 GMT References: <torrie.724148637@Xenon.Stanford.EDU> <1gdipoINN749@rave.larc.nasa.gov> <BzF5MF.2Lv@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> <1992Dec17.223358.12395@cs.brown.edu> <BzFoLA.LB1@news.cso.uiuc.edu> Sender: daemon@Apple.COM Followup-To: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware Organization: Apple Computer Inc. / Somerset Lines: 16