Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!labrea!decwrl!decvax!mcnc!unccvax!cbenda
From: cbenda@unccvax.UUCP (carl m benda)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Byte review. 386 v '020
Message-ID: <799@unccvax.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 23-Aug-87 15:40:30 EDT
Article-I.D.: unccvax.799
Posted: Sun Aug 23 15:40:30 1987
Date-Received: Mon, 24-Aug-87 03:46:53 EDT
References: <1376@imagen.UUCP> <116@faccs.UUCP>
Organization: Univ. of NC at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC
Lines: 15
Keywords: Benchmarks, 68020, 80386, 68030
Summary: Again... Numbers PLEASE!!

In article <116@faccs.UUCP>, dbt@faccs.UUCP (Data base translator ) writes:
> Looking at it this way, the '020 not only compares well with the '386; it
> blows the socks off its Intel counterpart, the '286. And the '030? I can't
> wait.

It really angers many people to see blind statements such as yours about the
68020 'blowing the socks off the '286'...  In case you hadn't been reading
the trade journals.  AMD has recently been shipping 16Mhz versions of the
80286 which incidently contains, on the chip, memory management capabilities.
Something that the 68020 MUST go off chip for, namely, the 68851 MMU.  I
believe most net readers would appreciate documented numbers, BEFORE you
make any more of these irritable BLIND statements.

/Carl
...decvax!mcnc!unnccvax!cbenda