Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!apollo!rehrauer
From: rehrauer@apollo.HP.COM (Steve Rehrauer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: A3000, 68040
Keywords: 3000, 68040
Message-ID: <4a312f82.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM>
Date: 4 May 90 15:01:00 GMT
References: <1990May3.043218.15590@cec1.wustl.edu> <1990May03.062713.25299@csuchico.edu>
Sender: root@apollo.HP.COM
Reply-To: rehrauer@apollo.HP.COM (Steve Rehrauer)
Distribution: na
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Apollo Division - Chelmsford, MA
Lines: 24

In article <1990May03.062713.25299@csuchico.edu> murphyd@cscihp.UUCP (Dave Murphy) writes:
>The 68040 is still a 32 bit chip.  It out performs the 030 because of it
>use of the pipeline.

The '030 is also pipelined, but not as well. :-)  The '040 also offers much
deeper on-chip caches (4k each for instruction and data, versus 256 bytes on
the '030).

>RISC processors and the 80486.  The 040 also has a built in FPU.
                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Here's the big win, if you're doing floating-point.  Inter-chip handshaking
delays between (say) an '030 and '882 can be pretty horrendous.  Compared to
an '030+'882, the '040 screams; an order of magnitude improvement in execution
times for floating-point intensive applications on an '040 isn't totally
whacko to hope for.  Your mileage will almost certainly vary.

>I have heard that the 040 operating at 25 MHz will outperform a 40 MHz 030.

It may be a bit premature to talk about '040 performance anyway, since no
one is now shipping a Real System(tm) with them, and (which is a good thing,
since) the preproduction chips aren't entirely bugless yet.
--
   >>"Aaiiyeeee!  Death from above!"<<     | (Steve) rehrauer@apollo.hp.com
"Spontaneous human combustion - what luck!"| Apollo Computer (Hewlett-Packard)