Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!ANDREW.CMU.EDU!jm7e+ From: jm7e+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU ("Jeremy G. Mereness") Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple Subject: Re: Thoughts about the rumored gs+ Message-ID: <4WuLvVy00XcL0-qUVi@andrew.cmu.edu> Date: 24 Jul 88 06:08:33 GMT References: <159@thelink.UUCP> Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 37 >>In article <8807182116.aa05050@SPARK.BRL.ARPA> Asaf Sokolowski writes: >> SE * //gs+ >>speed in MHz (standard) 7.x 7.x >Excuse me but isn't comparison of Mhz speeds between a 32-bit 68000 and a >16-bit 65SC816 kinda like comparing Apples to Oranges (no pun intended) >I would think that 8 extra bits to work with would have some sort of increase >in speed not to mention the 816's 8 bit data path limit to the rest of the >machine... Nope... its the other way around. In order to address memory, the 68000 must take an extra step for the extra address. However, the real story is not in clock speed, but in Instructions per second (IPS). The 65816 generally takes fewer cycles to perform the same basic tasks (reading, addressing, writing) than the 68000, no to mention the Intel 8088 and its family. In a nutshell, a 7.6 MHz 65816 would be effectively faster in most operations than a 7.6 MHz 68000. Yep, a 7.6MHz GS+ would be a super machine (sigh). > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------| > | oliver@thelink.UUCP |AT&T (219) 291-8343| GEnie K.SUMNER [Joel] | > | (Joel Sumner) |----------------------------------------------------| > |USnail 1505 Sheffield Ct. | It is always darkest before the lights go out | > | South Bend, IN 46614| | > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Capt. Albatross jm7e+@andrew.cmu.edu ============ disclaimer: These opinions are mine and will remain so until more intelligent or insightful or informed people are kind enough to show me the error of my ways. Remember: A mind is a terrible thing to baste.