[comp.arch] bus on new IBMs

wsd@cs.brown.edu (Wm. Scott `Spot' Draves) (02/23/90)

I read in Unix Today! that the new IBM RISCs used an improved MCA bus
that doubled its performance from 20Mb/s to 40Mb/s.  There is a
separate, higher performance, bus for memory.

Isn't this quite underpowered relative to the CPU?  What sort of
swapping performance can I expect?

For comparison, the SS1's S-bus is 100Mb/s, I think.


Scott Draves			Space... The Final Frontier
wsd@cs.brown.edu
uunet!brunix!wsd
Box 2555 Brown U Prov RI 02912

Robert.Sansom@CS.CMU.EDU (02/24/90)

Excerpts from mail: 23-Feb-90 bus on new IBMs Wm. Scott `. Draves@cs.b
(446)
> I read in Unix Today! that the new IBM RISCs used an improved MCA bus
> that doubled its performance from 20Mb/s to 40Mb/s.  There is a
> separate, higher performance, bus for memory.

Shouldn't that be 20-40 MB/s (peak).

Robert Sansom <rds@cs.cmu.edu>
School of Computer Science
Carnegie Mellon University

raob@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au (Richard Oxbrow) (02/24/90)

In article <WSD.90Feb22202840@pitman.cs.brown.edu> wsd@cs.brown.edu (Wm. Scott `Spot' Draves) writes:
>
>I read in Unix Today! that the new IBM RISCs used an improved MCA bus
>that doubled its performance from 20Mb/s to 40Mb/s.  There is a
>separate, higher performance, bus for memory.
>
>Isn't this quite underpowered relative to the CPU?  What sort of
>swapping performance can I expect?
>
>For comparison, the SS1's S-bus is 100Mb/s, I think.
>

You really need to have a look at the specifications of both buses.

In the case of the S-Bus you should read the specs.

	100 Mb/s @25Mhz "burst" thru' put for the S-Bus  

For the case of the S-Bus on a 16 2/3 Mhz bus, a'la SS1

	29 Mb/s @16 2/3Mhz "burst" thru' put (DMA)
	25 Mb/s @16 2/3Mhz "burst" thru' put (DVMA)

I would emphasis the the word "burst", you really need to have a close look
at the S-Bus specs in relation to the architecture of the machine with the
S-Bus.  The S-bus however is a nice and simple bus with a reasonabley high
thru' put. 


richard ..

#ps. any hints on the next line of Suns ? 
Richard Oxbrow			   |ACSnet	raob@mullian.oz
dept. of ee eng ,uni of melbourne  |Internet	raob@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU
parkville 3052 australia 	   |Arpa-relay  raob%mullian.oz@uunet.uu.net
fax   +[061][03]344 6678	   |Uunet	uunet!munnari!mullian!raob   

ewong@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Eddy Wong) (02/24/90)

In article <gZtMl3q00j8586TAoM@cs.cmu.edu> Robert.Sansom@CS.CMU.EDU writes:
>Excerpts from mail: 23-Feb-90 bus on new IBMs Wm. Scott `. Draves@cs.b
>(446)
>> I read in Unix Today! that the new IBM RISCs used an improved MCA bus
>> that doubled its performance from 20Mb/s to 40Mb/s.  There is a
>> separate, higher performance, bus for memory.
>
>Shouldn't that be 20-40 MB/s (peak).
>
>Robert Sansom <rds@cs.cmu.edu>
>School of Computer Science
>Carnegie Mellon University

	A 10Mhz NuBus can have a transfer rate close to 40 MB/s if
block transfers are used. This compare very nicely to the improved
MCA bus.

Eddy Wong
ewong@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca

raob@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au (Richard Oxbrow) (02/25/90)

>>that doubled its performance from 20Mb/s to 40Mb/s.  There is a
>>For comparison, the SS1's Sbus is 100Mb/s, I think.
 
>For the case of the SBus on a 16 2/3 Mhz bus, a'la SS1
>
>	29 Mb/s @16 2/3Mhz "burst" thru' put (DMA)
>	25 Mb/s @16 2/3Mhz "burst" thru' put (DVMA)
 

The SS1 is actually	^^^^^^^^20 MHz , my mistake .. (thanks dc@sun.com)
the rest of the numbers are correct (see. page 25, SBus Specification Rev.A)

	richard ..

#PS. And   Mb/s = mega BYTES per second (next time I will use MB/s)









Richard Oxbrow			   |ACSnet	raob@mullian.oz
dept. of ee eng ,uni of melbourne  |Internet	raob@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU
parkville 3052 australia 	   |Arpa-relay  raob%mullian.oz@uunet.uu.net
fax   +[061][03]344 6678	   |Uunet	uunet!munnari!mullian!raob   

casey@ultra.com (Casey Cox) (02/27/90)

In article <gZtMl3q00j8586TAoM@cs.cmu.edu> Robert.Sansom@CS.CMU.EDU writes:
>Excerpts from mail: 23-Feb-90 bus on new IBMs Wm. Scott `. Draves@cs.b
>(446)
>> I read in Unix Today! that the new IBM RISCs used an improved MCA bus
>> that doubled its performance from 20Mb/s to 40Mb/s.  There is a
>> separate, higher performance, bus for memory.
>
>Shouldn't that be 20-40 MB/s (peak).
>
The new IBM RISCs have a new micro channel bus that supports the extended
streaming protocol that allows data to be transferred every 100ns.  This new
40 MB/sec is of course their peak transfer rate and I'm sure the sustained rate
is somewhat lower, but it has nothing to do with the old 20 MB/sec rate on
other machines without the streaming protocol.

-- 
Casey Cox
Ultra Network Technologies / 101 Daggett Drive / San Jose CA 95134
casey@ultra.com  ...!ames!ultra!casey  (408) 922-0100 

grunwald@foobar.colorado.edu (Dirk Grunwald) (02/27/90)

at a local presentation, they said the protocol was:

Level 1:
			---------------------------------
	Addr		| AAA	|	| AAA   |       |
			---------------------------------
	Data		|	| DDD	|       | DDD   |
			---------------------------------
			^       ^
			+-------+
			  100ns

	Data is ready every 200ns

			
Level 2:
			---------------------------------
	Addr		| AAA	|	|	|       |
			---------------------------------
	Data		|	| DDD	| DDDD  | DDD   |
			---------------------------------
			^       ^
			+-------+
			  100ns

	Data is ready every 100ns, streaming only

Level 3:
			---------------------------------
	Addr		| AAA	| DDD	| DDD	| DDD	|
			---------------------------------
	Data		|	| DDD	| DDD	| DDD   |
			---------------------------------
			^       ^
			+-------+
			  100ns

	Two data are ready every 100ns, streaming only

their level 4 plan called for dropping the clock cycle to 50ns I
think.

yap@me.utoronto.ca (Davin Yap) (02/27/90)

grunwald@foobar.colorado.edu (Dirk Grunwald) writes:
>Level 3:
>			---------------------------------
>	Addr		| AAA	| DDD	| DDD	| DDD	|
>			---------------------------------
>	Data		|	| DDD	| DDD	| DDD   |
>			---------------------------------
>			^       ^
>			+-------+
>			  100ns

>	Two data are ready every 100ns, streaming only

The sales rep at the announcement told me that this was their 80 MByte/s
mode.  True of False?
--

grunwald@foobar.colorado.edu (Dirk Grunwald) (02/28/90)

>>>>> On 27 Feb 90 00:51:28 GMT, yap@me.utoronto.ca (Davin Yap) said:
DY> grunwald@foobar.colorado.edu (Dirk Grunwald) writes:
>Level 3:
>			---------------------------------
>	Addr		| AAA	| DDD	| DDD	| DDD	|
>			---------------------------------
>	Data		|	| DDD	| DDD	| DDD   |
>			---------------------------------
>			^       ^
>			+-------+
>			  100ns

>	Two data are ready every 100ns, streaming only

DY> The sales rep at the announcement told me that this was their 80 MByte/s
DY> mode.  True of False?
DY> --

could be - but, the 50ns implies 20M-DDD/second. I assume a DDD is 2
bytes? If not, and it's 4 bytes (i.e. 32bit wires), you'd get 80Mb/s,
not the 40 I was thinking of.

Then, by dropping to 50ns strobes, you'd get 160Mb/s. I think that
sounds right. They mumbled something about their optical interface,
which was supposedly 200Mb/s, but I don't think it goes through the
micro-channel, although it's controlled by the same controller.