Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!pdn!oz!alan
From: alan@oz.nm.paradyne.com (Alan Lovejoy)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.m88k
Subject: Re: Information wanted on m88000 Risc workstations
Keywords: 80386 m88000 Everex Opus UNIX DOS
Message-ID: <6915@pdn.paradyne.com>
Date: 8 Jan 90 22:19:34 GMT
References: <641@s5.Morgan.COM< <25A64468.11498@paris.ics.uci.edu> <648@s5.Morgan.COM>
Sender: usenet@pdn.paradyne.com
Reply-To: alan@oz.paradyne.com (Alan Lovejoy)
Organization: AT&T Paradyne, Largo, Florida
Lines: 75

In article <648@s5.Morgan.COM< amull@Morgan.COM (Andrew P. Mullhaupt) writes:
<Now the performance of these toys is really wild. The only real
<difficulties I have are:

<1. We have extensive need for Berkeley extensions in our software.
<We also use Sun's memory mapped files a whole lot. The System V
<alternative (shared memory) is OK, but we're pretty leery of any
<System V that isn't practically Release 4. Can I get close enough to
<Sun OS with an Aviion (Everex 8825, Opus 8120, etc.) If I can
<I may very well get one.

Motorola has been making a rather big noise for the past year and a half
about the "fact" that SVR4 with BCS would be available "first" for the 88k.
I have no idea whether they have or will deliver on this claim.  I suggest
you ask Moto/DG/Textronix/Opus/Everex/AT&T/Unix International.

<2. That ratio of Megaflops to MIPS sucks. Let me rephrase this. Given
<that the 88000 is the only RISC chip with onboard floating support,
<you've got to wonder why since it ends up being (relatively) so
<slow. Can you get an FPA for it? On the systems with the combined
<88000/80386 CPUs can you hang a quick Cyrix of the 80386, or a Weitek
<3167? or can you put a 4167 on the 88000? Does Motorola have some
<kind of remedy for those of us who like the looks of those soon to
<be announced 486/860 systems which will scream for floating point?

Double precision FP is slow primarily because the 88k does not have 64-bit data
paths internally.  That is the price Moto paid for putting the FPU on the same 
chip as  the IPU.  The benefits they get are: 1) no need to shuffle data between
integer and fp registers; 2) standardized fp instruction set; 3) assurance for 
SW developers that all 88k systems will have HW FP, and 4) you can buy 1 88100 
and 2 88200's at 16MHz for $499 (in lots of 1000, of course); try matching that
price/performance ratio with ANY other CPU.  Also, they started out several 
years behind MIPS with the Rx000 and 9 months behind SPARC.  They are now in 
production with 33MHz CMOS parts; MIPS and the SPARC gang are not.

Moto is obviously aiming the 88k at the mass market as a direct replacement
of the 68k.  MIPS is aiming at the very high end (for example, with the
R6000). The next generation of the 88k will be aimed at the high end, while
the current generation will be priced to capture the low and medium market
segments.  There is nothing in the 88k architecture to prevent Motorola from 
using 64 (or even 128) bit data paths and superscalar pipelining in the
next generation 88k.  Should happen within the next year and a half, probably
sooner rather than later (the current generation is almost two years old now,
after all.)  I don't think that the competition will be able to match Moto's 
prices on the current generation.  But who knows?

<Yeah, well that DecStation 3100 kind of stomps these 88000 boxes for
<double precision. And the application benchmarks in that issue show
<just how nasty the threat is from the 486 (e.g. the Cheetah Gold is
<in the same class as these other machines, and Weitek IS working on
<a floating point coprocessor for the 486. Also the Cheetah costs
<about 10,000 for the tested configuration.) It's not really clear
<how the price performance benchmark is arrived at, and the Dhrystone
<just doesn't represent what I need a box for. Right now I'm of a
<mind to get the 88000 if I can get good UNIX and some kind of 
<floating point help. Otherwise, it's back to square one. Oh well.

Buy a machine and you're buying into an architecture for quite some time,
as many purchasers of IBM/MS-DOS systems have found out.  Of course UNIX
helps in this regard, but only so much.  These machines are all within 
a factor of two in performance, WHICH COULD BE DUE TO SOFTWARE FACTORS
SUCH AS CODE GENERATORS.  You should consider all factors, not just
performance differences no greater than 2x.  How fast can each architecture's
performance be increased?  Which one has the best staying power in the
market?  Which one has achieved (or will achieve) the strongest market
position and standardization?

No matter which vendor you buy an 88k box from, you'll get the same
COMPATIBLE FPU.  And it won't cost extra.


____"Congress shall have the power to prohibit speech offensive to Congress"____
Alan Lovejoy; alan@pdn; 813-530-2211; AT&T Paradyne: 8550 Ulmerton, Largo, FL.
Disclaimer: I do not speak for AT&T Paradyne.  They do not speak for me. 
Mottos:  << Many are cold, but few are frozen. >>     << Frigido, ergo sum. >>