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