| From: | Xavier Messersmith |
| Date: | 17 Jan 2000 at 00:38:57 |
| Subject: | Re: MUI dead? |
From: Xavier Messersmith <xcaliber@xav.to>
On 16-Jan-00, Alex wrote:
>>> What do you expect from a 0x0 optimized [MUI] version?
>>
>> Personally, I expect the programmer to offer a version that doesn't
>> support processors that it's virtually useless on anyways.
>
> Programming must be done for the higher processors then, not just switching
> the compilers 0(2|3|4|6)0 mode on.
Why? I'm sure theres alot of optimization on te compiler level that can be
performed once '000/'010 support is banished.
>> What did you expect from an '020+ optimized Workbench?
>> (yeah yeah, only partial, get over it)
>
> Other than some math functions for extended precision, what can the 020 do
> faster due to its instruction set?
Its not just that certain instructions exist, but that the instructions have
varying speeds on varying processors and are more efficient in certain orders.
I believe one of the big things with the jump from 000 to 020 is in the 32-bit
move instruction, which pushes twice as much data at a time. Don't tell me
something like that is negligible... Especially for a graphically oriented
program!
> The question is where does noticable
> speed increase start, and where is it only the belief of the user that
> makes it faster? :)
But if several unnoticable speed increases do happen, then would it become
noticable? What if several of the same program with those speed increases are
running? It adds up... And some people don't have idle CPUs either...
--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
Independent contractors: Find your next project gig through JobSwarm!
You can even make money by referring friends.
<a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/jobswarm2 ">Click Here</a>
------------------------------------------------------------------------