home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: nyx.cs.du.edu!not-for-mail
- From: kathomas@nyx.cs.du.edu (Karl Thomas)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.datacomm,comp.sys.amiga.networking,comp.sys.amiga.misc
- Subject: Re: New Press Release!
- Date: 16 Mar 1996 21:31:20 -0700
- Organization: University of Denver, Math/CS Dept.
- Message-ID: <4ig4io$kj2@nyx.cs.du.edu>
- References: <4hivul$nn8@server05.icaen.uiowa.edu> <4i440e$1b9@infa.central.susx.ac.uk> <4i5hlq$rn3@nyx.cs.du.edu> <38233046@kone.fipnet.fi>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: nyx.nyx.net
- X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #3 (NOV)
-
- "Jyrki Saarinen" <jsaarinen@kone.fipnet.fi> writes:
-
-
- >> Sorry. Motorola's benchmarks showed the '060-66 being slower than a
- >> Pentium-66 in integer calculations and a little faster in floating
-
- >Bullshit. Pentium executes two integer inst. rarely, 060 can do
- >it with all instructions.
-
- These benchmarks came directly from Motorola and were posted right here about
- a year ago.
-
- >My real-world test (drawing texturemapped polygons to memory)
- >scored the same on 060/50 (compiled with SAS/C) what P90
- >scored. (Linux and gcc)
-
- And we all know how efficient gcc is.
-
- >> point. But Motorola still hasn't released the '060-66. The '060-50 is
- >> barely faster than a 040-40. That was the main reason that Daystar
-
- >That is bullshit too.
-
- Daystar also had this in their position statements a year or two ago. If
- the '060 was really that good, don't you think Motorola would still be
- investing R&D in it to speed it up? (they are not). Don't you think
- Apple would still be using them?
-
-