Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!uwvax!rutgers!sri-spam!ames!lll-lcc!pyramid!voder!apple!bcase From: bcase@apple.UUCP (Brian Case) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Fairchild Clipper performance? Message-ID: <6745@apple.UUCP> Date: Sun, 15-Nov-87 23:00:17 EST Article-I.D.: apple.6745 Posted: Sun Nov 15 23:00:17 1987 Date-Received: Tue, 17-Nov-87 03:30:50 EST References: <56700004@ada-uts> Reply-To: bcase@apple.UUCP (Brian Case) Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, USA Lines: 67 In article <56700004@ada-uts> callen@ada-uts writes: >Is anyone aware of any Unix systems based upon the Fairchild Clipper >ship set? I got the data sheets on this set (well, board) maybe a year >agao and it looked like a nice clean architecture. I am curious how >its performance might stack up to, say, the AMD29000 or MIPS machines. How fortuitous. I was just comtemplating generating a posting (read: flame) about an Electronics article about the Clipper. So now I get to bundle info with flame. The intergraph C32 personal computer/workstation is based on the Clipper. I hear it isn't so bad, but the performance isn't much greater than a 25 MHz 68020 based machine (I heard this from someone developing compilers for it. SPEA, a West German company, is apparently making IBM PC plug-in cards based on the Clipper. The CEO of SPEA claims (according to Electronics): "A 33-MHz Clipper-100, Seng says, runs six times faster than a 20-MHz Intel 80386." [I'm sorry, I just can't believe this.] Now the flame. Read in last week's Electronics Magazine an article about the new clipper which will run at an amazing (I say that sincerely) 50 MHz clock rate. At 50 MHz, I personally would expect much more than what they can deliver, but let's face it, they win hands down in the catagory of exploiting old technology (the 33 MHz version was implemented in 2.0 micron CMOS, the 50 MHz is probably in 1.5 or so). My beef is with the bar-chart showing what speed memory is needed to achieve claimed performance. They try to show that the Clipper has the upper hand because it requires only regular DRAM -- no cache. However, they go a little to far when they claim the the Am29000 requires 3 ns, yes three nano seconds, static RAM. I know that for single-bus-cycle memory accesses, fast access times are required, but the actual access time is more like 14 ns (admittedly, this is still quite fast). BUT, even the performance claims with caches were only talking about 2 cycle caches, which leaves quite a comfortable margin for implementation. And VDRAMs are hardly required in 3 ns speed grades. What burns me here is not so much the specific attack on my own work, but the fact that these STUPID INDUSTRY MAGAZINES WILL PRINT, HAPPILY, SUCH UNMITTIGATED BULL PUCKY!! THEY EVEN SEEM TO TAKE DELIGHT IN THIS STUPIDITY. I have seen it happen again and again. I mean, get this quote from the second paragraph of the article: "However, the latest 32-bit contenders are closing in on Clipper." Er, I thought it was the other way around, that is, the latest Clipper might be closing in on the other guys. I have seen these damnable publications make errors on our stuff too, both making it sound better than it is and worse than it is. Once you know what is really going on, you see how bad these jerks really are. Often, their words are no better than noise! Isn't there something we can do?!?! Should we all write letters to these editors? Should someone start a publication that actually has some technical accuracy? I am getting so fed up with this situation that I really believe there is room for a new trade magazine. I still remember the time I tried to get some RISC references printed along with an article in Computer Design (one of the WORST magazines): "I'm sorry, references are usually reserved for scholaraly journals. We're not like that." Well, that's for damned sure. We wouldn't want to actually educate or otherwise help our engineers, now would we. I know John Mashey has taken the initiative a few times. John, what do you have to say abou this situation? One possible comment is that this discussion doesn't belong in this newsgroup, so suggestions for other homes will be gladly accepted.