Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!uhnix1!sugar!karl
From: karl@sugar.hackercorp.com (Karl Lehenbauer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Benchmarks for 3000 vs 2500
Message-ID: <5682@sugar.hackercorp.com>
Date: 9 May 90 15:51:40 GMT
References: <11445@cbmvax.commodore.com> <24883@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Reply-To: karl@sugar.hackercorp.com (Karl Lehenbauer)
Distribution: comp
Organization: Count Floyd's 3-D House of Unix
Lines: 18

In article <24883@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (David C. Navas) writes:
>One ST magazine I read even
>suggested that you were wasting your money buying a 25MHz 3000 because
>it would not run any faster than a 16 MHz machine!  

Don't believe it for even one second.  The 25 MHz machine would be faster
even if the RAM was the same speed... caches and everything, you know...
There are lots of 68030 CPU cycles where the CPU doesn't even access main
memory.  Plus for floating point the 25 MHz machine has a 68882 rather than
the '881 in the 16 MHz one.

Also, traditionally, ST people have probably been the greatest spreaders of
lies and misinformation about the Amiga of any group, like the ST dealer
here in Houston that claimed, and probably still claims, that the Amiga
doesn't multitask.
-- 
-- uunet!sugar!karl
-- Usenet access: (713) 438-5018