[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: PowerMac compatible
>>>>> "ClockCHWC" == ClockCHWC <clockchwc@aol.com> writes:
In article <4jou63$ler@newsbf02.news.aol.com> clockchwc@aol.com (ClockCHWC) writes:
>> Mat Hostetter has already done much of the work that is
>> necessary to do PPC emulation. We are indeed planning on
>> supporting that in the future. There will be a performance
>> hit, of course, but part of the genius of Mat's new synthetic
>> CPU is that we'll be able to target other architectures as
>> well, so a real cranking Alpha may be able to emulate a PPC at
>> a pretty impressive rate. We won't have actual numbers for a
>> few more months, though.
ClockCHWC> Still, at the rate you guys are going, I figure it'll
ClockCHWC> crank! Insignia's is pretty much a dog! It runs at
ClockCHWC> around 486-25Mhz on a PowerMac 75. I'm sure ARDI will
ClockCHWC> do better with the numbers on PPC emulation than
ClockCHWC> Insignia has done on 486 emulation!
Given what I know, I suspect our core technology is indeed better than
Insignia's. However, to be fair, it is much easier to do our CPU
emulation (emulate a 68LC040 on a 386 and above) then it is to do
theirs ('486 *with MMU functionality* on a PPC). On the other hand, I
our OS rewrite is technically more challenging than the glue that
they've written to interface to the Microsoft code that they've
licensed.
Bottom line, I agree with you; our PPC emulation will crank, but the
comparison to Insignia is a tricky one due to all the different
variables.
--Cliff
ctm@ardi.com
References: