Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-lcc!ames!ucbcad!faustus
From: faustus@ucbcad.berkeley.edu (Wayne A. Christopher)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: 64 Vs 32
Message-ID: <1314@ucbcad.berkeley.edu>
Date: Wed, 18-Mar-87 00:43:52 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbcad.1314
Posted: Wed Mar 18 00:43:52 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 19-Mar-87 04:56:53 EST
References: <3810013@nucsrl.UUCP> <985@rpics.RPI.EDU> <1310@ucbcad.berkeley.edu> <3302@gitpyr.gatech.EDU>
Organization: CAD Group, U.C. Berkeley
Lines: 15

In article <3302@gitpyr.gatech.EDU>, kludge@gitpyr.gatech.EDU (Scott Dorsey) writes:
> >What we need to ask is, who will need more than ~1G of memory?
> 
>    "You don't really need 64K.  48K is so much memory that nobody 
>     really knows what do with all of it.  " 

Hmm, I seem to have said this the wrong way...  I was asking what
applications that people run right now are up against the 1G limit, not
suggesting that there are no such applications.  For my purposes, and I
think for the purposes of 95% of computer users, there are better ways
to use chip area right now than for 64-bit datapaths.  Sure, it would
be nice to have a 100 MIPS machine with a 128-bit datapath, but we have
a bit of time to wait until it's on our desks.

	Wayne