home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.hardware
- Path: yama.mcc.ac.uk!liv!lucs!news
- From: fish@csc.liv.ac.uk (S.E. Morris)
- Subject: Re: PowerPC !
- Sender: news@csc.liv.ac.uk (News Eater)
- Message-ID: <DnJMuw.79C@csc.liv.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 15:25:44 GMT
- References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960220162223.624A-100000@scsscsc1.reading.ac.uk>
- <4gldfg$e5k@hasle.sn.no> <DnFHzu.KGp@hermes.hrz.uni-bielefeld.de>
- <4h3e7u$7da@madeline.ins.cwru.edu>
- Nntp-Posting-Host: fish@congo.csc.liv.ac.uk
- Organization: Computer Science, University of Liverpool, UK
- X-Newsreader: knews 0.9.4
-
- In article <4h3e7u$7da@madeline.ins.cwru.edu>,
- aq722@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (John Gregor) writes:
- >
- >
- >>A PPC604/133 MHz will be about 20 times faster than an unaccelerated A4000T
- >>(after BYTEMark results).
- >
- >Yes, this is acceptable performance for today. However, by the time
- >a PPC based Amiga comes out, this will be very lackluster performance.
- >
- >John
- >
- Didn't a recent Pentium/PPC comparison by BYTE result in the conclusion
- that the PPC *on average* carries out twice as much work as an equivelent
- speed Pentium?? So you need a 266Mhz Pentium to rival a 133Hmz PPC.
-
- If this is true, then a PPC604/133 ain't such a bad option. And it's
- cheaper AFAIK than the equivelant Pentium.
-
- -FISH- ><>
-
-