Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!pesnta!valid!eric
From: eric@valid.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.micro.ns32k
Subject: 80x86 vs. 680x0 (was Re: National's 32332)
Message-ID: <350@valid.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 18-Jun-86 12:13:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: valid.350
Posted: Wed Jun 18 12:13:04 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 20-Jun-86 00:47:53 EDT
References: <746@usl.UUCP> <253@spar.UUCP> <2793@sdcrdcf.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: Valid Logic, San Jose, CA
Lines: 39

> In article <367@tolerant.UUCP> kevin@tolerant.UUCP (Kevin Flory) writes:
> >
> >The National 32032, 32332, and the Motorola 680XX both have a much better 
> >instuction set than the Intel 8086, 186, 286, and 386. This may not be
> >as noticible at the machine code level, but when in compiled codes, especialy
> >'C', the National and Motorola instrucitons sets are much more efficient.
> > Executable file sizes, 6502 assembler program:
> > Intel, 8086, Microsoft C 3.0 -> 15110
> > Motorola 68000, UniSoft cc   -> 19500
> > This is more efficient?
> > ----------------
> > Mike Farren
> > hoptoad!farren
> 
> No, not as memory space goes, but let's not compare different complilers
> with different libraries and exepect people to use this as measure of
> efficientcy. 
> 
> But I wasn't refering to memory space. I was refering execution, we were
> talking about exectution speed. If you would like to demestrate this you
> can take a compiler that either runs on both machines or one that produces
> code for both processors. Write a small 'C' routine that uses number of
> 'C' instructions, with not many library calls. I beleive that you will
> find that the 68K and the 32K are much more useful to the compiler.
> -- 
> Kevin Flory @ Tolerant Systems, San Jose CA
> ..{bene,mordor,nsc,oliveb,pyramid,ucbvax}!tolerant!kevin
We went one step further - John Reiser at Valid took SVS 68010 pascal
object code and munged the bits into 80286 code. Guess what? The 286
code was 15%-20% smaller. You can't complain about diferent compilers,
libraries, etc. in this example. As fas as speed is concerned, the 286
was comperable to the 68010 ONLY UP TO 64K worth of text and data. After
that point, the 286 fell flat on its face.

In the immortal words of Steve Sargent (valid!sbs):
"Intel: still the best *@#&$% traffic light controllers around".
----------
Eric Burger
valid!eric