Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!dell!sauer
From: sauer@dell.dell.com (Charlie Sauer)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: DMA on RISC-based systems
Message-ID: <1443@dell.dell.com>
Date: 5 Jun 89 15:53:04 GMT
References: <46500067@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> <28200325@mcdurb> <2819@scolex.sco.COM> <1429@dell.dell.com> <2822@scolex.sco.COM>
Reply-To: sauer@dell.UUCP (Charlie Sauer, )
Organization: Dell Computer Corp., Austin, Tx.
Lines: 16

In article <2822@scolex.sco.COM> seanf@scolex.UUCP (Sean Fagan) writes:
>For all intents and purposes, they're the same machine.  However, the 760 is
>*much* faster than the 6600 (the 760 is the second fastest 170 machine; the 
>fastest being one that has 2 processors and an extra 3 bits of addressing 
>[for the OS, not user]).

I know I was being picky, but since I'm stuck in that vein, let me offer a
slightly more substantive quibble, slightly more relevant to the original
topic reflected in the subject line:  Isn't it true that the 6600 and the
7600 differed in that the PP's were all peers in the 6600 but the 7600 had
one PP that had authority over the others?
-- 
Charlie Sauer  Dell Computer Corp.     !'s:cs.utexas.edu!dell!sauer
               9505 Arboretum Blvd     @'s:sauer@dell.com
               Austin, TX 78759-7299   
               (512) 343-3310