curry@nsc.UUCP (04/03/87)
Today news releases went out on the NS32532. I won't repeat the news release here (30 Pages), because while I type very fast, it's not without error, and its not THAT fast. Anyway, the release can be seen in Electronics Magazine and EE Times as well as others. For further information, you can call your local NSC sales office for a preliminary information book. If there are enough people that can't get to a sales office, I can probably dig out the phone number of someone who isn't getting enough phone calls (:>D) to post on the net. Just for interest, simulated Dhrystone performance of around 18,000 with on chip physical-address instruction and data caches, and on board demand- paged MMU. Of course, the 32532 is code compatible to the rest of the NS32000 family.
amos@instable.UUCP (04/05/87)
Number #####
#
32 ##### 32
#
##### is alive!
--
Amos Shapir
National Semiconductor (Israel)
6 Maskit st. P.O.B. 3007, Herzlia 46104, Israel Tel. (972)52-522261
amos%nsta@nsc.com {hplabs,pyramid,sun,decwrl} 34.48'E 32.10'Ndoon@unsvax.UUCP (04/06/87)
In article <4173@nsc.nsc.com> curry@nsc.UUCP (Ray Curry) writes: >Today news releases went out on the NS32532. ... > >Just for interest, simulated Dhrystone performance of around 18,000 with ^^^^^^^^^ Simulated?, simulated!!??!! Does National make a habit of introducing parts that it doesn't yet have working versions of ??? Cheers, A devoted 32000 fan, Harry Reed ...!unsvax!doon
cramer@clem.UUCP (04/07/87)
In article <143@unsvax.UUCP> doon@unsvax.uucp (Harry W. Reed) writes: >In article <4173@nsc.nsc.com> curry@nsc.UUCP (Ray Curry) writes: >>Today news releases went out on the NS32532. ... >> >>Just for interest, simulated Dhrystone performance of around 18,000 with > ^^^^^^^^^ > Simulated?, simulated!!??!! Does National make a habit of introducing >parts that it doesn't yet have working versions of ??? National is not the only company that announces parts before they are ready - such announcements are common in the industry. More irksome are those advertisements that make it sound like the product is already here, when it is not. Can you say "Microsoft and OS/2?" Sure, I knew that you could... Sam Cramer uucp: {cbosgd,decwrl,hplabs,seismo,ucbvax}!sun!cramer arpanet: cramer@sun.com
rick@seismo.UUCP (04/08/87)
In article <16268@sun.uucp>, cramer%clem@Sun.COM (Sam Cramer) writes: > it is not. Can you say "Microsoft and OS/2?" Sure, I knew that you could... Can you say Sun and GKS? ---rick
leder@ihlpm.UUCP (04/08/87)
> National is not the only company that announces parts before they are > ready - such announcements are common in the industry. More irksome are > those advertisements that make it sound like the product is already here, when > it is not. Can you say "Microsoft and OS/2?" Sure, I knew that you could... > You know it has to be a tough call for people in marketing to know when to announce a product with the leaders in the industry (read IBM) making announcements for products with six and ten month delivery dates just to keep purchasers from picking a product that is already available. For instance if we look at their most recent announcement, the model 80 which would compete with the COMPAQ machine released (and purchaseable) with the 386 processor was just a comeon to keep their customers in line. I don't see how we could ask National do deal any differently. Bob Leder - Just an interested bystander
jon@eps2.UUCP (04/09/87)
In article <143@unsvax.UUCP>, doon@unsvax.UUCP (Harry W. Reed) writes: > Simulated?, simulated!!??!! Does National make a habit of introducing > parts that it doesn't yet have working versions of ??? Doesn't the much loved AMD29000 fall into this category also? When the AMD FAEs were out here, we were told that the 29000 exists only as a software simulator and as a model on a Zycad simulator. I was pretty impressed that the Zycad could hold together to simulate something that big. Jonathan Hue DuPont Design Technologies/Via Visuals leadsv!eps2!jon
roy@phri.UUCP (04/09/87)
In article <16268@sun.uucp> cramer@sun.UUCP (Sam Cramer) writes: > More irksome are those advertisements that make it sound like the product > is already here, when it is not. Can you say "Microsoft and OS/2?" > Sure, I knew that you could... > > Sam Cramer uucp: {cbosgd,decwrl,hplabs,seismo,ucbvax}!sun!cramer > arpanet: cramer@sun.com Even more irksome than that are companies that *accept purchase orders* for products that don't exist yet. Can you say "Sun-3 FPA"? Can you say "Sun-3 GKS"? Sure, I knew you could! Now, can you explain why I ordered both of these items in February 1986, only to find out after the systems arrived that the FPA's were still in testing and that GKS was still being written, with an expected delivery time of early summer 1987! People who live in glass houses ... -- Roy Smith, {allegra,cmcl2,philabs}!phri!roy System Administrator, Public Health Research Institute 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016 "you can't spell deoxyribonucleic without unix!"
roger@nsc.UUCP (04/11/87)
In article <189@houxj.UUCP>, nelsn@houxj.UUCP (M.NELSON) writes: > > In article <4173@nsc.nsc.com> curry@nsc.UUCP (Ray Curry) writes: > > >Today news releases went out on the NS32532. ... > > >Just for interest, simulated Dhrystone performance of around 18,000 with > > Can anyone from National tell us what frequency this 18,000 > is at? EE Times (3/30/87) says 20 MHz parts will be available > in 4Q87 and 30 MHz parts in 1Q88? Are these dates accurate? > The article was a bit unclear on the dates. The NS32532 samples during 4Q87 will be 20 MHZ. The dhrystone results I published earlier are as noted at 30 MHZ. Roger Thompson
chongo@amdahl.UUCP (04/11/87)
In article <744@instable.UUCP> amos@instable.UUCP (Amos Shapir) writes: >In article <6145@amdahl.UUCP>, chongo@amdahl.UUCP (Landon Curt Noll) writes: >> What was their claimed 'simulated' Dhrystones of a 32332? >Please support this claim by numbers: OK. Let is take the 'demo claim' made my NSC during the stockholders meeting of 1985. They 'said' that the 32332 = 3*32032 at the same clock rate. Now let us take a later claim made by a NSC person on the net: >From: nsc!roger >I don't care which compilers you use on which version of the >benchmark, the 532 is better than 5X improvement over >todays 332 and over 11.7X faster than the 32032. Now if we note that: (532_rate/332_rate) / (532_rate/032_rate) == 332_rate/032_rate his numbers show that: 32332 = (2.34)*32032. In the very same article, the same person writes: >From: nsc!roger >the 32532 is 2.53X the 32332 at the same frequency >the 32532 is 3.86 the 32032 at the same frequency This set of figures show that: 32332 = (1.53)*32032 (rounded in NSCs favor) Returning to the question at hand. The 'benchmark factor' could be shown to be: 3/2.34 or 3/1.53. If the 32532's 18000 Dhrystones underwent the same change it would be reduced to: 14040 or 9180. <<i'll reply in AMOS's other questions in another article later>> Let me state again: I don't hate the 32000 chip set. The system I now use at home is a Symmetric 375 with a 32016 CPU. (which I bought after I left NSC) I'm not 100% down on the 32000 chip set. On the other hand: I once had to select between a 32332 (provided to me for free) and a 68020 (paid out my own pocket) for use in a data encryption box. Both ran at the same Mhz and used the same 0 wait state memory. Both had an MMU. Both took interrupts. Both programs were hand tuned to perfection. (I wanted a fast encryption box, not a benchmark!) The 68020 won hands down. On the third hand: My next home system will be a Sun, unless someone can show me a similar priced 32000 based system that will out perform a SUN III. I'm open to suggestions. chongo <> /\oo/\ -- [views above shouldn't be viewed as Amdahl views, or as views from Amdahl, or as Amdahl views views, or as views by Mr. Amdahl, or as views from his house]
henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) (04/12/87)
> Simulated?, simulated!!??!! Does National make a habit of introducing > parts that it doesn't yet have working versions of ??? > > Cheers, > A devoted 32000 fan How quickly we forget... Remember the 32016 and 32032, which were not only introduced but sold and delivered in quantity before fully working versions existed? I have a vague impression that they cleaned up their act somewhat for the 32332, but a lot of people (including me) had already lost interest. -- "We must choose: the stars or Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology the dust. Which shall it be?" {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!henry
levy@nsc.nsc.com (Jonathan Levy) (01/04/90)
In article <1201@cirrusl.UUCP> grenley@sunkist (George Grenley) writes: >In article <371@illian.UUCP> darylm@illian.UUCP (Daryl V. McDaniel) writes: >Perhaps I mis-remember the problem slightly. AS of Jan'89, all steppings of the >'532 (A1,A2,B0,B2) would lock up under the following conditions. > > >I don't know whether any later stepping of the '532 fixed this on >chip or not - NSC fired me in January, and I haven't kept up. > >Daryl, you might want to dig into this a little further. I may have the >details wrong, but the problem is real, albeit obscure. > >Hope this helps any potential '532 developers out there... As of January 1989 National started shipping the '532 rev. C which corrected all the above mentioned bugs. The buglist for the NS32GX32 was published in the december '89 issue of uP Report. The only addition for the NS32532 buglist is that RDVAL and WRVAL instructions can produce a wrong result if address bit A31 is high and the protection level is not OK. Bottom line: There is absolutely no problems for '532 developers out there: The S/W tools are available, the HP ISE is available, support is available, and naturally, CLEAN AND SOLID SILICON IS AVAILABLE !! Jonathan