Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!lll-winken!taurus!aldebaran!schweige
From: schweige@aldebaran.cs.nps.navy.mil (Jeffrey M. Schweiger)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: What to buy??(numbercruncher)
Message-ID: <2394@aldebaran.cs.nps.navy.mil>
Date: 18 Jun 91 16:49:25 GMT
References: <71A0D62DC000263C@FANDM> <1991Jun17.124116.1900@sugar.hackercorp.com> <63@ryptyde.UUCP>
Reply-To: schweige@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil (Jeffrey M. Schweiger)
Organization: Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey CA
Lines: 22

In article <63@ryptyde.UUCP> dant@ryptyde.UUCP (Daniel Tracy) writes:
>Responding to the following:
>
>"Even the IIfx isn't as fast as a 3000/25."
>
>That's bull. The IIfx will blow the 3000 away. It has two dedicated I/O
>chips (SCSI DMA too, which can be used with Unix), and a killer graphics
>coprocessed board (the 8-24GC) (which was released with the IIfx). I doubt
>you've done any kind of serious benchmarks.

Actually, it probably depends on the application.  Also, if we're talking
about standard configuration machines.  If I recall correctly, the IIfx CPU
is rated at 40MHz, but the bus speed is limited to 20MHz.  This would yield
a faster CPU for the Mac IIfx and a faster bus for the Amiga 3000/25.

Jeff Schweiger

-- 
*******************************************************************************
Jeff Schweiger	      Standard Disclaimer   	CompuServe:  74236,1645
Internet (Milnet):				schweige@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil
*******************************************************************************