Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!motcsd!starnet!sschaem From: sschaem@starnet.uucp (Stephan Schaem) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: Blitter vs. 040 (was: Computer Architecture question Message-ID: <1991May17.172032.23993@starnet.uucp> Date: 17 May 91 17:20:32 GMT References: <1991May15.125954.1993@NCoast.ORG> <1991May15.213917.11992@ugle.unit.no> <1991May16.043705.6698@NCoast.ORG> <1991May16.203434.4709@ugle.unit.no> Organization: Starnet-Public Access UNIX-Los Altos,CA 415-949-3133, login:info Lines: 10 This is crazy! 'twice faster has a 68000' do people know why? Because CBM took timing from a loop with instruction fect... Again the Blitter is like a 68020, and do its internal calculation WHILE accesing the bus! So you CANT squeze more out of the bus, and if you can go faster with a 680x0 than the blitter the bus usage is the 'same' (With cache on cpu to do logical op on data while accesing the bus). The blitter curent problem in a A3000, its not 32bit etc...