🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <shinr.337.301FEC44@coral.indstate.edu> shinr@coral.indstate.edu (Shin, Ronald S) writes:

>>>If Apple's new emulator (on the 9500) can outperform all 040 Macs, why
>>>can't Softwindows do the same relative to a 66 MHz 486DX2 (which I assume
>>>is equivalent to a 33 MHz 040)?

>>No, clock doubled '040s are not as fast as clock doubled 486s.  That's why 
>>Apple never labeled them as being clock-doubled at all (until recently, when 
>>they decided to go in for some hype).

>>A 68040 @ 40 mhz is just a tad slower than a 486/66.  Also keep in mind that 
>>we're talking about a BETA of SoftWindows 2.0, which could have some debugging 
>>code holding it back.  We'll have to wait until it's release to see how fast 
>>it really is.

>You're joking, right?  Softwindows on my friend's Quadra 68040 33 mHZ 
>barely matched a 386 DX 25.  This was with 16 megs of RAM as well...  

I'm talking about each machine running its native applications, not emulators 
like SoftWindows and Executor.  A Quadra at 33/66 mhz can probably run Mac 
programs about as quickly as a DX2/50 can run Windows programs, assuming the 
programs are equally well written :).

-Ericb@psu.edu



-Ericb@psu.edu