Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!kth!draken!tut!santra!tukki!tarvaine
From: tarvaine@tukki.jyu.fi (Tapani Tarvainen)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: 68020 vs. 68030 speed (was Re: 80486 vs. 68040 code size)
Message-ID: <700@tukki.jyu.fi>
Date: 12 May 89 12:04:36 GMT
References: <922@aber-cs.UUCP> <8081@killer.Dallas.TX.US>
Reply-To: tarvaine@tukki.jyu.fi (Tapani Tarvainen)
Distribution: eunet,world
Organization: University of Jyvaskyla, Finland
Lines: 15

In article <922@aber-cs.UUCP>, pcg@aber-cs.UUCP (Piercarlo Grandi) says:
# on the few 68030 machines around (Next, Macs, Suns), it seems that one
# statement I have read (68030 == 68020+10/15%) is quite reasonable

In article <8081@killer.Dallas.TX.US> elg@killer.Dallas.TX.US (Eric Green) writes:
>Figures I've seen indicate about a 20-30% improvement.

The Dhrystone test in our HP9000/340s (68030 at 16MHz) runs almost 
exactly 50% faster than in 319s (68020 also at 16MHz).
Of course the Dhrystone measures only integer processing speed
of the cpu, but nonetheless if you get only 10-15% speedup I
suspect the bottleneck isn't the cpu.
-- 
Tapani Tarvainen                 BitNet:    tarvainen@finjyu
Internet:  tarvainen@jylk.jyu.fi  -- OR --  tarvaine@tukki.jyu.fi