home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.netspace.net.au!usenet
- From: astroboy@netspace.net.au (Paul Dossett)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.applications
- Subject: Re: Is MUI processor intensive?
- Date: 10 Feb 1996 08:31:21 GMT
- Organization: NetSpace Online Systems
- Message-ID: <1394.6613T995T2132@netspace.net.au>
- References: <4f80sp$m2h@due.unit.no> <1468.6611T653T370@datashopper.dk>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-a2-22.mel.netspace.net.au
- X-Newsreader: THOR 2.22 (Amiga;TCP/IP) *UNREGISTERED*
-
- >>~ 2x faster than the A1200.
-
- >Wow, that was a nice letter, and your presumably write for datakompaniet,
- >really makes you wanna buy goods from you :-( Don't give such idiotic
- >answers, give us some measurements, and some data on the A620. To make the
- >A620 twice as fast as A1200 would take more than a twice as fast coprocessor,
- >as the CHIP bus in the A600 is stil only 16 Bit, while the A1200 has 32 bit
- >wide bus. This means that while the CPU might be twice as fast, the chipram
- >will still only be half as fast. This is the facts, look at some schematics
- >if you don't beleive them.
-
- So what? The machine will still be faster. On the whole, the AGA chipset
- doesn't particularly speed things up. AIBB rates my ECS system as running
- graphics tasks faster than a 1200, thanks to a faster processor.
-
- Most programs (word processors, raytracers, samplers) need CPU power.
- Graphics throughput is so completely unimportant to the argument that you can
- discount it. The A600 with the A620 *will* be a lot faster than an A1200 for
- everyday use.
-
- These are the facts, try using the systems in comparison and running
- benchmarks if you don't believe them.
-
-
- --
- Paul Dossett | Yamaha, Epiphone, Pearl, Paiste | Amiga 2000/040/21/365/3.1 __
- -------------| Looking for a band to play with | Amiga CD32/020/2/CD/3.1__///
- mail me! : astroboy@netspace.net.au.. | '76 Toyota Corolla 1.2 \XX/
-
-