Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!think.com!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!quiche!tinyguy
From: tinyguy@cs.mcgill.ca (Yeo-Hoon BAE)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: (Video) Hardware Idiots ?
Message-ID: <1991Jun13.175041.15679@cs.mcgill.ca>
Date: 13 Jun 91 17:50:41 GMT
References: <22368@cbmvax.commodore.com> <1991Jun12.232718.2373@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <22392@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Sender: news@cs.mcgill.ca (Netnews Administrator)
Organization: SOCS, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Lines: 27

In article <22392@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes:
>In article <1991Jun12.232718.2373@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes:
>>In article <22368@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes:
>
>>  So the max transfer rate, with 0 wait states is 10mb/sec (theoretical) on
>>the fast ram bus at @25mhz. 
>
>Well, that's to fast RAM, which actually does have wait states.  You can't run
>zero wait states on a 25MHz 68030 using DRAM, at least not without extra magic.
>

  This is what I was puzzled for a while(still am). Why does 030 needs
  MUCH faster DRAM to get it's 0 state, compare to 386? I know that on
  386(at least from it's manual), you can get a 0 w/s by using 80ns
  interleaved memories. This was at 20MHz, but it seems that 20MHz 030
  won't go even close to achieving that! Am I mistaken? Are the 386 board
  manufacturers not telling the truth?

-TG


+-----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+
| Yeo-Hoon Bae      tinyguy@homer.cs.mcgill.ca              |       /// |
| Dept. Computer Science, McGill University, Canada         |      ///  |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|  \\\///   |
| Amiga2000 & 386SX                                         |   \XX/    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+-----------+