🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4is19k$r59@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu>,
David T. Wang <veakblad@Glue.umd.edu> wrote:

[regarding the Pentium's high performance in computing various functions ]

>I think that this may be because these cosines stuff is supported in hardware 
>and not by a library on an X86 chip. 

I had a vague recollection that I had seen that somewhere.  Thanks for
confirming it.

Incidentally, MacOS System 7.5.3 improves my PPC's performance in FP 
significantly.

>
>: The compiler used was CodeWarrior 7.0.  For a comparison between
>: CodeWarrior 7.0 and the Motorola compiler, which generates faster
>: code, visit the PowerPC pages on the Motorola site.  
>
>And the Dell XPS P-90, by definition, the 1.0 standard, which compiler did it
>use? could it not use a better compiler?

I was anticipating a question about compilers, and optimization, and so I
mentioned that I did not use the best available. 

The ByteMarks baseline was done on (quote) :

  The indexed score is the raw score of the system under test divided by
   the raw score obtained on the baseline machine. As of this release,
   the baseline machine is a DELL 90 Mhz Pentium XPS/90 with 16 MB of RAM
   and 256K of external processor cache. (The compiler used was the
   Watcom C/C++ 10.0 compiler; optimizations set to "fastest possible     
   code", 4-byte structure alignment, Pentium code generation with
   Pentium register-based calling.)  

>
>: The benchmark results are astonishing : would you have expected 
>: a 66/33 MHz system to be remotely comparable to a 90/66 MHz system ?
>
[Regarding chip technology]
>
>PPC601-100 is at .35 micron.  
>PPC604-100,120,132 is at .5 micron
>PPC604-150 is at .35 micron.

Well, I'm looking at the Motorola page :

http://www.mot.com/SPS/PowerPC/library/literature/fs/601.html

The 100Mhz PPC601 is said to be 
Quote
     * 2.5-volt implementation with 5-volt I/O
     * 0.5-micron static CMOS technology
     * 74 mm2 die size
     * 2.8 million transistors
End quote
The IBM web site says that the PPC 604 150 MHz is a 0.5 micron CMOS.

Check for example :

http://fnctsrv0.chips.ibm.com/products/ppc/DataSheets/604/604data-html3.html

>
>P5-100 is at .6 micron
>P5-133,150,166 is at .35 micron. 
>P6-150 is at .6 micron
>P6-200 is at .35 micron
>

[deleted]

>Chicken and Egg problem. No one is able to over take Intel on the technology
>front until they invest the money to get and edge on processor architecture/
>processor design/process technology/fab capacity.  But if they don't already
>have the edge, what can make people purchase their systems, so that they
>can get the money to invest? And no, Intel won't find a hardtime staying
>competative with its own X86 architecture.

All it says is that a shift in hardware architecture is going to be a
slow process -- there will be no revolution.  PPC will slowly become a
relatively stronger contender in the course of time.

-arun gupta