Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!peter
From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: MIPS (was Re: NeXT Press Release)
Message-ID: <1991Apr28.125055.13965@sugar.hackercorp.com>
Organization: Sugar Land Unix -- Houston, TX
References: <1991Apr24.043828.7213@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu> <aodGmk7x1@cs.psu.edu> <1991Apr24.135141.21417@convex.com>
Distribution: comp
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 1991 12:50:55 GMT

In article <1991Apr24.135141.21417@convex.com> swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) writes:
> I saw the SPECmarks numbers.  What conclusion are you drawing from them?
> It looked to me like the 68040 beat the SPARC more than the SPARC beat the
> 68040.

That's like claiming your bicycle is as good as a car because it can keep up
with an ailing VW Beetle. The SPARC is at best a mediocre RISC chip. Try
comparing it to the 88000 or the MIPS.
-- 
Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
<peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.