home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!yale.edu!ira.uka.de!uka!uka!news
- From: S_JUFFA@iravcl.ira.uka.de (|S| Norbert Juffa)
- Newsgroups: comp.arch
- Subject: Re: MC68020 -- how does it compare?
- Date: 14 Sep 1992 16:04:17 GMT
- Organization: University of Karlsruhe (FRG) - Informatik Rechnerabt.
- Lines: 32
- Distribution: world
- Message-ID: <192d61INNkd8@iraul1.ira.uka.de>
- References: <1992Sep11.134019.12511@ryptyde.cts.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: irav1.ira.uka.de
- X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.23
- In-Reply-To: scott@ryptyde.cts.com's message of Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:40:19 GMT
-
- In <1992Sep11.134019.12511@ryptyde.cts.com> scott@ryptyde.cts.com writes:
-
- >
- > Hi all,
- >
- > Does anyone have some kind of comparison between the 68020 and
- > the i386? I'm interested in performace differences mostly.
- > If this is included in a FAQ somewhere, please tell me where I can find
- > it and I'll go away quietly. 8-)
- >
- > Thanks in advance,
- >
- > Scott
- >
- > --
- > INTERNET: scott@ryptyde.cts.com | "Nuke the homeless gay
- > ARPANET: ryptyde!scott@nosc.mil | baby whales for Jesus!"
- > UUCP: {crash, nosc}!ryptyde!scott | - bumper sticker
-
- For 32-bit code the overall performance of the i386 and the 68030 is about the
- same for chips operating at the same frequency. The 68020 isn't very much
- slower than the 68030 (~10%), so its performance is also similar to the i386.
- This is from memory, refering to a benchmark comparison by Motorola that I read
- quite a while ago. Seemed to be quite fair, though (Usually, I work with Intel
- processors). If you want to know for sure, just dig up the SPECmarks for the
- Macintosh models that use the 68030 (If I rememer correctly, an i386-33
- performs at 6.5 SPECmarks (1989 benchmark suite)).
-
-
- Norbert
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Norbert Juffa email: S_JUFFA@IRAVCL.IRA.UKA.DE Live and let live!
-