Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!rice!uw-beaver!uw-entropy!quick!srg
From: srg@quick.COM (Spencer Garrett)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.m68k
Subject: Re: Performance stats for MC68040?
Message-ID: <7136@quick.COM>
Date: 14 Nov 89 09:30:37 GMT
References: <1989Nov5.222513.1572@sdsu.edu> <2890@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> <1989Nov12.172830.10798@Neon.Stanford.EDU>
Distribution: na
Organization: Quicksilver Engineering, Seattle
Lines: 15

In article <1989Nov12.172830.10798@Neon.Stanford.EDU>, kaufman@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Marc T. Kaufman) writes:
-> In article <23948@cup.portal.com> mslater@cup.portal.com (Michael Z Slater) writes:
-> 
-> -Moto has not yet formally introduced the 040, and has not given any performance
-> -data, other than to say it is more than 2x the 030 (and faster than the 486).
-> 
-> -It has two 4K caches, an on-chip FPU, and more pipelining...
-> 
-> Its going to be interesting to see if I can buy enough ram to hold the
-> trap exception frame.  :-)

Actually, since the 040 uses instruction restart instead of instruction
continuation, the bus error frame is *smaller* than that of the 030.
(And a *lot* smaller than the 030/882 combination.)  The code to deal
with exceptions will probably be a bit trickier, though.