Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!apple!voder!pyramid!ctnews!mitisft!jay
From: jay@mitisft.Convergent.COM (Jay O'Conor)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware
Subject: Re: IIcx vs. IIci
Message-ID: <1365@mitisft.Convergent.COM>
Date: 24 Jan 90 01:08:27 GMT
References: <3892@mace.cc.purdue.edu> <135600013@p.cs.uiuc.edu>
Reply-To: jay@mitisft.UUCP (Jay O'Conor)
Organization: Unisys Network Computing Group, San Jose
Lines: 48

In article <135600013@p.cs.uiuc.edu> gillies@p.cs.uiuc.edu writes:
>
>There is supposed to be a workstation mac released this spring, see
>MacWeek.  You might wait to make a decision.
>
>My opinion is that a IIci is a poor design because it is unbalanced.
>It's got this blazing CPU, but the disk I/O and NuBus are no faster,
>and the primitive 640*480*8 bit display card slows down the CPU (must
>be that Apple graphics card sales are waning...), and for all this, you
>get to pay a lot of extra money (and even more later, when cache cards
>get popular).
I'm not sure that I agree.  While there is certainly room for greater
hardware performance improvement, the IIci is certainly a credible system.
I could understand your complaint if it used 100-120ns memory, but with
the 80ns memory and the option of a cache card, the CPU/memory part of
the system is certainly balanced.  There is nothing that keeps the CPU
from running at near full speed.  The use of the '030s burst mode is
also necessary to achieve a balanced CPU/memory system, and the IIci
uses it.
>
>For the money, you could get a IIcx and 32-bit graphics (supermac),
>and have the option of adding a quickdraw graphics accelerator later.
Bleecch!  The IIcx is only a 16Mhz '030, and 100ns memory speed.  No
burst mode, and no option for a cache card.
You can always put a 32-bit graphics card in the IIci and you still have
the option of adding a quickdraw graphics accelerator later - just like
the IIcx.  What's the difference?
>
>The IIci *should* have heralded a new generation of macintoshes, with
>disk DMA interface at the very least, or perhaps a 20Mhz Nubus, or a
>56000 signal processor, or a QuickDraw accelerator, or just about
>*anything* but what they released.
I don't think that these _features_ really make a balanced system.
They are just that - features.  Yes I would like DMA and a Quickdraw
accelerator - but those are additional features that would go into an
even higher performance system.  The IIci hits a certain price/performance
point and it's a good one.  DMA, 20Mhz Nubus, 56000 DSP, and Quickdraw
accelerator hit a totally different price/performance point - one that I
doubt that _I_ could afford!
>
>
>Don Gillies, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Illinois
>1304 W. Springfield, Urbana, Ill 61801      
>ARPA: gillies@cs.uiuc.edu   UUCP: {uunet,harvard}!uiucdcs!gillies


Jay O'Conor
Unisys/Convergent