Xref: utzoo comp.arch:16537 comp.os.mach:442 comp.sys.m88k:221 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!van-bc!ubc-cs!calgary!cs-spool.cpsc.ucalgary.ca!deraadt From: deraadt@enme.ucalgary.ca (Theo &) Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.os.mach,comp.sys.m88k Subject: Re: 88k vs. i860 for a shared memory parallel processor running MACH Message-ID: Date: 15 Jun 90 05:51:32 GMT References: <1890@xn.LL.MIT.EDU> <5473@vanuata.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> Sender: news@calgary.uucp (Network News Manager) Organization: UofC Lines: 13 In-Reply-To: tommyk@cs.glasgow.ac.uk's message of 14 Jun 90 11:05:49 GMT In article <5473@vanuata.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> tommyk@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (Tommy Kelly) writes: > I don't know how the 860 scores on this, but the SICS guys checked out > a number of processors and found that the 88K was the only architecture > suitable. Of course, the 68040 is in this catagory now too, as long as code cache coherency is not broken by the same processor. No?