Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sample.eng.ohio-state.edu!purdue!haven.umd.edu!uvaarpa!murdoch!hemlock!clc5q
From: clc5q@hemlock.cs.Virginia.EDU (Clark L. Coleman)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: VISC - speeding up moto cisc mpu's?
Message-ID: <1991May20.145332.19406@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: 20 May 91 14:53:32 GMT
References: <2786@lee.SEAS.UCLA.EDU> <177@armltd.uucp>
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Distribution: comp
Organization: University of Virginia Computer Science Department
Lines: 16

In article <177@armltd.uucp> abaum (Allen Baum) writes:
>
>Actualy, there are several reasons the '040 SPEC numbers are better-
>
>1- faster clock, resulting from better process technology,

This does not make any sense to me. The only released SPEC numbers for
the 68040 are for 25MHz chips. There are 68030 chips running at 25MHz
for several years now, and likewise for the 68882 FPU that went with
the 68030. Any improvement in SPEC numbers over the 68030 did not come
from the 68040 having a faster clock rate.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore, be 
regarded as a criminal offence." E.W.Dijkstra, 18th June 1975.
|||  clc5q@virginia.edu (Clark L. Coleman)