Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/28/84; site lll-crg.ARPA Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!gymble!lll-crg!brooks From: brooks@lll-crg.ARPA (Eugene D. Brooks III) Newsgroups: net.micro.16k Subject: Re: Re: Corrigenda (24-bit addresses) Message-ID: <435@lll-crg.ARPA> Date: Wed, 31-Dec-69 18:59:59 EST Article-I.D.: lll-crg.435 Posted: Wed Dec 31 18:59:59 1969 Date-Received: Sat, 9-Mar-85 19:15:05 EST References: <794@sjuvax.UUCP> <5025@utzoo.UUCP> <2342@nsc.UUCP> <952@watdcsu.UUCP> <2373@nsc.UUCP> <983@watdcsu.UUCP> <2385@nsc.UUCP> <344@ <400@terak.UUCP> Organization: Lawrence Livermore Labs, CRG group Lines: 16 > So you're gonna spend maybe 20 G's or more on a memory system, and > to "cut costs" you're gonna use an off-the-shelf microprocessor like > a 68020 or 32032? Gimme a break! I currently do memory intensive simulation work where it would be desireable to have more than 16mb of physical data memory. We now use a VAX 11/780 for this simulation work. We are purchasing of a multiprocessor to use in this simulation work (yes, using all of the cpus on the same problem) where the basic cpu node is of all things that meager little 32032. It seems that a dozen or so of them can do a good job of keeping more than 16mb busy. We sure would like to have more than 16mb of real memory available for our work and you can sure bet that National will widen the virtual address bus as soon as they get the bugs out of the current chip set. As far as using a custom processor is concerned there currently isn't a more cost effective source of cycles than that $500(wishful thinking) 32032 chip set. You just have to use more than one chip set at a time on your problem.