Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 Fluke 1/4/84; site fluke.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!floyd!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!microsoft!fluke!kurt From: kurt@fluke.UUCP (Kurt Guntheroth) Newsgroups: net.micro,net.micro.68k,net.arch Subject: Re: 68020 vs. 32032 Message-ID: <1048@vax2.fluke.UUCP> Date: Wed, 6-Jun-84 12:27:49 EDT Article-I.D.: vax2.1048 Posted: Wed Jun 6 12:27:49 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 9-Jun-84 08:05:18 EDT References: <452@trwspp.UUCP> Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Everett, WA Lines: 23 go ahead bug, make my day. I like the 32032. Simpler chip (less transistors == more reliable (?), MUCH more orthogonal instruction set (better -> faster compilers, faster, more compact object code), 32032 available now (6mhz version), along with fpu and mmu. Now, when the 68020, motorola fpu and advanced mmu become available, the fanciest system you could build with motorola parts will probably outperform the fanciest system you can build with (currently proposed) national parts. You will pay for that extra bit of performance through the nose though. National seems to have decided to do simpler components optimized to what they consider to be the average use, rather than fancy parts that can be adjusted to optimize your particular use. In exchange, national was able to produce their parts, while motorola is still dreaming. No connection to mot or nsc, always my own opinions -- Kurt Guntheroth John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc. {uw-beaver,decvax!microsof,ucbvax!lbl-csam,allegra,ssc-vax}!fluke!kurt