Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: net.micro.68k,net.micro.amiga,net.micro.atari16,net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: The Motorola 68030
Message-ID: <7183@utzoo.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 4-Oct-86 01:54:36 EDT
Article-I.D.: utzoo.7183
Posted: Sat Oct  4 01:54:36 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 4-Oct-86 01:54:36 EDT
References: <2270@gitpyr.UUCP> <7637@sun.uucp> <729@sauron.UUCP>, <200@mipos3.UUCP>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 20
Keywords: here we go again...

> And what about the new family jewels?  Should I feel vindicated that Mot
> has finally decided that on-chip memory management is a good idea?  ...

Only when Intel decides that on-chip caches are a good idea.  The 68030
has *both*.  So does the Clipper, by the way.  The MIPS chip set likewise
does the MMU and half (the hard half) of the cache.  Where's Intel?


> ...what about performance?  Why would a new, ultra-high end user choose
> the 68030 over, say, the Clipper, or the MIPS chips, each of which
> (if you believe the numbers) should exceed the 68030's performance (with
> the promise of delivering more sooner) and are available, in some semblance, 
> today?

Probably no particularly good reason except compatibility.  I notice,
however, that the line of argument has shifted slightly:  we don't hear
the word "Intel" any more.
-- 
				Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
				{allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!henry