Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!mips!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!muslix.llnl.gov!jac
From: jac@muslix.llnl.gov (James Crotinger)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Recommendations needed about A2500/30 as research workstation
Message-ID: <50518@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV>
Date: 1 Mar 90 16:49:40 GMT
References: <6623@cps3xx.UUCP> <2017@sauron.Columbia.NCR.COM> <22494@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Sender: usenet@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV
Reply-To: jac@muslix.llnl.gov.UUCP (James Crotinger)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory/UC Davis
Lines: 17

In article <22494@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (David C. Navas) writes:
>
>The '030' is, of course, a faster chip than an equivalently clocked '386.
>The '486' is, of course, faster yet.
>
>David Navas                                   navas@cory.berkeley.edu

   This seems to be a widespread myth among Motorola product users.
MIPS magazine (now Personal Workstations) has tested a wide variety of
'386 machines and a few '030 machines, and the '386 machines always
come out slightly on top (and in computing power/$ they come out way
on top (of course MIPS has never tested an A2500/30)). 

   However, if Motorola's info is accurate, the '040 is faster than an
equivalently clocked '486.

   Jim