Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cbmvax!daveh
From: daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: 80486 vs. 68040 code size
Message-ID: <6921@cbmvax.UUCP>
Date: 19 May 89 04:19:57 GMT
References: <4152@ficc.uu.net>
Distribution: eunet,world
Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA
Lines: 53

in article <4152@ficc.uu.net>, peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) says:

> And if it wasn't for the sea of dollars you refer to the 386es would cost
> as much, if not more than, the 030s. By the way, the first 030 implementation
> I know of was the CSA 68030 card for the Amiga.

I think you could get a VME card from Motorola before that, but I can't think
of anything else.

>> If I were going to compare the Intel/Motorola families, I would couple
>> them as 6809/8088, 68010/80286, 68020/386.

> 68020 -- 80286

Time frame wise, fer shure; the 68020 came rapidly on the heels of the actual
release of the 68010; one of the reason the '010 fell into the cracks.  As
for preformance, the '286 pales in comparison, though the marketplace's great
acceptance of the '286 led to real fast versions of it long before any fast
68000s or 68010s came along.  Neither the '286 nor the 68000/10 had all you'd
want in a CPU.

> 68030 -- 80386

For what you get, this is a good pairing.  They're in at least the same 
league, speed wise, both have built-in paging MMUs, etc.  The first 20MHz
68030s I got my hands on were last May or so.  In fact, I got a 20MHz part,
hot off the presses, one Friday morning, and a 25Mhz part hand carried
later that afternoon.  Both were of the "it works at room temperature", no
marks on the package, variety.  Moto underestimates themselves; the 20MHz
part has been running daily for over a year...

> 68040 -- 80486	# Both announced but not available.

These seem to track each other feature-wise, though from what I've read of
each, the '040 look much more sophisticated in many respects.  That's not to
say Intel didn't do their homework, they did.  But they seem to have spent
lots of thought on how to make the '486 a much better engine for MS-DOS
applications, rather than how they might make it the fastest possible thing
that eats up '386 instructions.  Considering what '486 machines will be 
doing, I think that was the right decision.

> My memory is that the 68020 has been out nearly as long as the 286, and that
> the 68030 has been around nearly as long as the 68030.

I could hardly argue that last one.  First big Motorola splash on the '030
was at Fall Comdex a year and a half ago.  I think folks were building '386
machines then, but they weren't significant.  Time flies...

> Peter da Silva, Xenix Support, Ferranti International Controls Corporation.
-- 
Dave Haynie  "The 32 Bit Guy"     Commodore-Amiga  "The Crew That Never Rests"
   {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      PLINK: D-DAVE H     BIX: hazy
              Amiga -- It's not just a job, it's an obsession