Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!inmos!inmos.co.uk!davidb
From: davidb@inmos.co.uk (David Boreham)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: SRAM vs. DRAM, 33MHz 386 UNIX-PC
Message-ID: <2028@ganymede.inmos.co.uk>
Date: 8 Sep 89 02:22:02 GMT
Sender: news@inmos.co.uk
Reply-To: davidb@inmos.co.uk (David Boreham)
Organization: none
Lines: 25

cliffhanger@cup.portal.com (Cliff C Heyer) posted some questions about
the speed of 386PC's (too long to repeat here). My response is that the
main thing he is missing is that you don't get performance for nothing.
386PC's and most other computers are designed by highly skilled engineers
who know all the tricks there are to extract the maximum performance for
a given number of dollars. The PC market especially is so competitive that
you can assume that if BYTE tells you that the fastest machine for $nK is
machine y, then most other machines sold for $nK will be within 20% of the
performance of the fastest one. There *are* no hidden easy answers to getting
extra performance---you just need to shell out more cash. Of course the 
technology moves on and new architectures are developed but generally everyone
is using the same technology as each other at any particular point in history.

Now, if MIPS or SUN or IBM could develop a 20ns SRAM which cost the same
as a 140ns cycle-time DRAM they they could wipe the floor with the
competition. However the memory market (and most other components) is universal
and IBM or whoever don't have any great advantage over the independent chip
manufacturers.  




David Boreham, INMOS Limited | mail(uk): davidb@inmos.co.uk or ukc!inmos!davidb
Bristol,  England            |      (us): uunet!inmos-c!davidb
+44 454 616616 ex 543        | Internet : @col.hp.com:davidb@inmos-c