[net.micro] 9511, 9512, 8087

tc (12/15/82)

FUNCTION	Am9511(4Mhz)	Am9512(3Mhz)	8087	8086
Data Formats:
Floating	Not IEEE	Almost IEEE	IEEE	
Fixed		16/32		n/a		8/16/32/64
BCD		n/a		n/a		18 digits

Interface:	Peripheral	Peripheral	Co-Processor

Timing (Floating Point Operations)
Add/Sub		22 usec		42 usec		17 usec	1600 usec
32-bit Mult	37		150		19	1600
32-bit Div	44		170		39	3200
Load		(programmed)	(programmed)	10	1700
Store		(programmed)	(programmed)	21	1200
SQRT		200		n/a		36	19600
TAN		1400		n/a		90	13000

$$$$(approx)	195		165		150

COMMENTARY
0.	The times for the 8086 and 8087 are from the 1982 Intel
	Component Data Catalog, page 8-72.  The times for the
	AM9511 and 9512 are from the AMD data sheets.
1.	The Am9511 and Am9512 are easy to interface to nearly any
	processor or bus.  If you can figure out to hook up a
	UART (say 8251), you can do the 9511 or 9512.
2.	Somebody asked about 9511's having problems with negative
	numbers.  I don't think so.  Please point me to the reference.
3.	The 8087 does not have all the trig functions build in; you
	have to derive them from Partial Tangent and Partial Arctangent.
	The 9511 does have lots of trig functions and the 9512 doesnt
	even pretend.
4.	If I were interfacing to an 8086 or 8088, I would choose
	the 8087.  If I were interfacing to anything else, I
	would choose the 9511.
				Tom Crawford
				(...ucbvax!adm70!tc)