🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <799@unccvax.UUCP| cbenda@unccvax.UUCP (carl m benda) writes:
|In article <116@faccs.UUCP>, dbt@faccs.UUCP (Data base translator ) writes:
|> Looking at it this way, the '020 not only compares well with the '386; it
|> blows the socks off its Intel counterpart, the '286. And the '030? I can't
|> wait.
|
|It really angers many people to see blind statements such as yours about the
|68020 'blowing the socks off the '286'...  In case you hadn't been reading
|the trade journals.  AMD has recently been shipping 16Mhz versions of the
|80286 which incidently contains, on the chip, memory management capabilities.
|Something that the 68020 MUST go off chip for, namely, the 68851 MMU.  I
|believe most net readers would appreciate documented numbers, BEFORE you
|make any more of these irritable BLIND statements.

From IEEE Micro, June 1987, "Evaluating Microprocessors" by John C. McCallum
and Tat-Seng Chua.  From a table on page 74 (edited to show only 286 and the
020):

            286/287     M68020
            16 Mhz     16 MhZ
Scientific   0.14        0.43
Commerical   0.48        1.44
Systems      0.70        1.50
General      0.31        0.93

Numbers are in a measurement unit call pMIPS (millions of psudeo-instruction
per seconds).  See the article for details of the psudeo-instructions used,
but the basic idea is they are common macro-level instructions for various
common operators.  One problem is that they are all memory-to-memory, which
hurts the '020 compared to the 286 because of the extra register resources
in the 020.  To repeat, the 020 BLOWS THE SOCKS OFF the 286 by a factor
of 2-1 (at least).  
|
|/Carl
|...decvax!mcnc!unnccvax!cbenda

Jerry Whitnell                           It's a damn poor mind that can only
Communication Solutions, Inc.            think of one way to spell a word.
						-- Andrew Jackson