Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!samsung!uunet!cbmvax!daveh From: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: The 68050 - end of the 680x0? (was Re: The Amiga's Future) Message-ID: <22544@cbmvax.commodore.com> Date: 18 Jun 91 16:26:18 GMT References: <5068@orbit.cts.com> <16647@darkstar.ucsc.edu> < <1308@cbmger.UUCP> <28@ryptyde.UUCP> > <01dH!cmr@cs.psu.edu> <1991Jun10.072945.8821@neon.Stanford.EDU> <22365@cbmvax.commodore.com> <1991Jun13.003707.19785@neon.Stanford.EDU> <2 Reply-To: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA Lines: 77 In article <1991Jun17.052423.7631@metapro.DIALix.oz.au> bernie@metapro.DIALix.oz.au (Bernd Felsche) writes: >In <22460@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >>SPARC machines are faster than 80x86s, and Sun's making it easy for these >>guys to make these copies (of course, not real fast ones, but the low end >>systems). >What, no "real fast ones"? I hear that Cypress makes 40MHz set which >run just as fast as anything "produced" by Sun and some "clone" makers >actually get their systems using these chipsets running faster. Well, it's easy to get fast SPARC Integer processors. Entire chip sets as good or better than the ones Sun's using in the SparcStation 2 are announced but not yet shipping in volume, at last last I heard (a few weeks ago in "Microprocessor Report"). The off-the-shelf parts from LSI are slower versions of the Sun chip set. >There's also a 40MHz, single-chip SPARC on the horizon. That's an >awful lot of grunt. Yeah, a year or two ago I figured SPARCs, along with most of the other RISCy toys, would be getting to the integration level of 68040 and 80486 pretty quickly. That's where the smaller IPU and FPU really pay off, you'll fit more cache or alternate processing units in the same silicon space, or the same in less (going for cheap rather than fast). >Some of this discussion really should be in comp.arch, but all of >these people who expound the virtues of RISC often ignore the fact >that binaries on RISC are larger. As an example, I've had binaries >explode by 100%, transferring from 68030 to 88000. Lots of it depends on what you're doing, but in general, you would expect at least some code increase. First of all, all the real RISCs out there have very orthogonal 32 bit long instructions, rather than these variable length operataions on CISCs and Transputers (now there's some real instruction reduction, though you need zillions to get any work done). You lose alot on complex things with memory addressing and preinc/postdec thrown in, though most RISCs win in math with three operand instructions. >Even with optimizers on, there was still a 50% growth. The RISC therefore needs >more native MIPS to achieve the same real throughput. True. But even Marketing departments are getting away from quoting native MIPS these days. In fact, the only one I've seen lately doing that is INMOS/ Thompson for their Transputers. >It costs more to store the binaries both on disk, and while executing. It costs more to store them, but less to decode them. With the relative priorities these days between speed and the need to save memory, I think the RISC machines are on the right track. >As a low-end workstation CPU, the 68k should be more cost-effective. I >simply can't imagine why Sun didn't continue with the 68k workstations >at entry level. Like HP did, for instance. My guess is that they wanted to push SPARC with all their effort, to make sure that none of the IC houses had any questions about their commitment. And with all the clone-ability, they're definitely trying to move upscale. >Even their last 68k series was knobbled through not making the best use that >they could of the `030. Yeah, I think they pretty much just dropped the '030 into their '020 systems, like Apple did with the first '030 based Mac IIs. HP and Apollo did it better. >One never knows if CSG will start to make them if Motorola lose >interest. :-) If only they had a 0.8um CMOS line.... -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "This is my mistake. Let me make it good." -R.E.M.