From: jbailey@world.std.com (jim bailey)
Subject: Re: Quadra 900/950 differences
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Lines: 43

jim@jagubox.gsfc.nasa.gov (Jim Jagielski) writes:

>jbailey@world.std.com (jim bailey) writes:

>>rdk2@cec2.wustl.edu (Robert David Klapper) writes:

>>>	I also believe that the 950 fixed a bug in the CPU which screwed up
>>>some floating point calculations.
>>>-- 
>>>Robert D. Klapper
>>>Washington University in St. Louis
>>>rdk2@cec2.wustl.edu
>>>Lubarsky's Law of Cybernetic Entomology:  There's always one more bug.

>>Does someone have any definite information on this.  This is the
>>first I've heard of it.  How does the CPU get fixed by a hardware
>>upgrade?  This doesn't make much sense to me.

>Let's see now... The differences between the 950 and 900 are
>basically:

>	1. Runs at 33MHz, not 25MHz
>	2. Has 25MHz I/O bus, not 16MHz
>	3. Upgraded Graphics controller
>	4. #3 results in Q950 requiring 80ns VRAM, not 100ns
>	5. ROM fixes:
>	    a. rounding errors in floating point calculations
>	       at 15th digit

So patch the ROMs with the latest OS version.  I don't see
how this is a problem.

>	    b. Ethernet problems with more than 16 buffers

>So, no doubt, the person was refering to 5a, hardly "screwing
>up" though :)

>-- 
>    Jim Jagielski               |  "And he's gonna stiff me. So I say,
>    jim@jagubox.gsfc.nasa.gov   |   'Hey! Lama! How about something,
>    NASA/GSFC, Code 734.4       |   you know, for the effort!'"
>    Greenbelt, MD 20771         |

