grwalter@uwaterloo.ca (Fred Walter) (05/03/90)
Just curious : how will the 68030 & 68882 @ 25 MHz compare (performance wise; dhrystones, whetstones, MIPS, etc.) with a 80486 @ 25 MHz with a reasonably sized cache ? fred
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (05/03/90)
In article <1990May2.223658.24827@watdragon.waterloo.edu> grwalter@uwaterloo.ca (Fred Walter) writes: >Just curious : how will the 68030 & 68882 @ 25 MHz compare (performance >wise; dhrystones, whetstones, MIPS, etc.) with a 80486 @ 25 MHz with a >reasonably sized cache ? The 486 is roughly a tad less than twice the speed of the 68030, integer wise, at the same clock speed. For floating point it's noticably better than twice as fast. The 68040 is expected to be closer to three times the 68030 integer speed, and up to ten times faster at floating point. > fred -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "I have been given the freedom to do as I see fit" -REM
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (05/09/90)
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >The 486 is roughly a tad less than twice the speed of the 68030, integer >wise, at the same clock speed. For floating point it's noticably better >than twice as fast. >The 68040 is expected to be closer to three times the 68030 integer speed, >and up to ten times faster at floating point. A friend and I were doing some mixed up math on the above figures and here is what we got :-) If 1 040 = 3 030s and 1 486 = 2 030's, then 1 a 68040 based Amiga would equal 1 486 based clone with an Amiga 3000 thrown in to help it out. Depending on the relative clock speeds of course. -- John Sparks | D.I.S.K. 24hrs 2400bps. Accessable via Starlink (Louisville KY) sparks@corpane.UUCP | | PH: (502) 968-DISK If you've seen one nuclear war, you've seen them all.