🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5398@watdragon.waterloo.edu> palarson@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Paul Larson) writes:

>Why is it that some of the 020/881 add-on cards allow the SE to
>perform faster than the Mac II?  It seems to me that a machine built
>around these two processors should be able to out-preform one which
>merely has the processors added on as an afterthought.  Is there some
>flaw in the Mac II architecture?

The Mac II is designed to allow use of 150nS memory chips.  It uses
one wait-state per memory access (if my own memory serves!).  Some of
the accelerator cards for the SE use faster memory chips and no
wait-states during memory access.  So, they're faster at the same
system clock rate.

The tradeoff is between cost and performance.  From what I read in the
trade press, I see that some of the accelerator boards use a
relatively small, very high speed cache memory to avoid the need for a
large amount of expensive RAM.  It's simpler and cheaper to build a
system with a uniform memory structure.

Whether you consider this a flaw in the Mac II architecture depends on
your thirst for speed and the depth of your pockets.

Ephraim Vishniac					  ephraim@think.com
Thinking Machines Corporation / 245 First Street / Cambridge, MA 02142-1214

     On two occasions I have been asked, "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put
     into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?"