Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!rutgers!sri-spam!sri-unix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!burdvax!bpa!cbmvax!daveh From: daveh@cbmvax.cbm.UUCP (Dave Haynie) Newsgroups: net.micro.apple Subject: Re: Re: InCider's comments on the new //GS Message-ID: <844@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP> Date: Mon, 6-Oct-86 15:28:02 EDT Article-I.D.: cbmvax.844 Posted: Mon Oct 6 15:28:02 1986 Date-Received: Wed, 8-Oct-86 01:04:09 EDT References: <2092@ecsvax.UUCP> Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA Lines: 31 >> One thing positive that I can say is that the 65816 is a pretty >> neat CPU. I'd like to get my hands on a //GS to dhrystone it. >> From what I've read, the claims are that the 3 MHz65816 can beat an 8 >> MHz 68K chip. Also WDC promised a 65832 that fits the same socket >> by 1987. > > Yes this chip really screams, it's close to being a RISC (Reduced > Instruction Set Machine) technology chip. It's interesting how the > hardware world has come full circle and the 65xxx family is still > viable. The '816 isn't that fast, and its hardly RISC. One of the basic RISC philosophies is to have a single set of instructions that read and write memory, while everything else is a register-to-register instruction. This lets things happen inside, very quickly. This also requires a large number of registers (the Berkely RISC has near 200, as I recall). The '816 still has just on general purpose register, and lets nearly every instruction access memory. And it has to access memory 8 bits at a time, while the 68000 can touch 16 at a time. The '816 is also missing more sophisticated instructions, like multiplies. Its certainly an advance over the 6502, but it compares much more closely to the 8088. > Rick Fincher > > Ranger@ecsvax -- ============================================================================ Dave Haynie {caip,ihnp4,allegra,seismo}!cbmvax!daveh These opinions are my own, though if you try them out, and decide that you really like them, a small donation would be appreciated.