[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: