From: ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer)
Subject: Re: x86 ~= 680x0 ?? (How do they compare?)
Organization: Netcom. San Jose, California
Distribution: usa
Lines: 30

rvenkate@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Ravikuma Venkateswar) writes ...
>ray@netcom.com (Ray Fischer) writes:
>>040 486 030 386 020 286
>
>How about some numbers here? Some kind of benchmark?

Benchmarks are for marketing dweebs and CPU envy.  OK, if it will make
you happy, the 486 is faster than the 040.  BFD.  Both architectures
are nearing then end of their lifetimes.  And especially with the x86
architecture: good riddance.

>Besides, for 0 wait state performance, you'd need a cache anyway. I mean,
>who uses a processor that runs at the speed of 80ns SIMMs? Note that this
>memory speed corresponds to a clock speed of 12.5 MHz.

The point being the processor speed is only one of many aspects of a
computers performance.  Clock speed, processor, memory speed, CPU
architecture, I/O systems, even the application program all contribute 
to the overall system performance.

>>And roughly, the 68040 is twice as fast at a given clock
>>speed as is the 68030.
>
>Numbers?

Look them up yourself.

-- 
Ray Fischer                   "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth
ray@netcom.com                 than lies."  -- Friedrich Nietzsche
