Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sjuvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!sjuvax!jss From: jss@sjuvax.UUCP (J. Shapiro) Newsgroups: net.micro.16k Subject: Re: Corrigenda Message-ID: <928@sjuvax.UUCP> Date: Thu, 7-Mar-85 21:28:23 EST Article-I.D.: sjuvax.928 Posted: Thu Mar 7 21:28:23 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 11-Mar-85 11:13:57 EST References: <794@sjuvax.UUCP> <5025@utzoo.UUCP> <2342@nsc.UUCP> Organization: Saint Josephs Univ. Phila., Pa. Lines: 38 Curt Sampson ihnp4!alberta!jeff writes: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- This sounds great. However, consider the fact that it takes five to twenty hours to generate each picture of this resoloution on a VAX 11/780 that has no other processes running. Now, who is going to be dumb enough to use a 32032 to do something like this? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) The VAX memory access speed relies on write back cache - the bus cycles are 400 ns. With a 10 Mhz 32032 *or* 32016 one can get real memory response times of 200ns. This saves time. 2) it is not clear that the 32016 doesn't compare to a VAX. With the right kind of paging algorithms and hardware, one might very well outperform an 11/750 WITH FPA. I haven't tried it, but it looks possible. 3) now that I have finally got my hands on Rev N chips I can go build one ;-)))) <- note new convention - insipid grin. On a serious note, it seems clear to me that things like picture processing require dedicated hardware to do well *anywhere.* One might get fine performance out of something like the NCR/32 by microcoding dedicated instructions, but I am a firm believer in overpowering hardware - no one is forcing anyone to use that power. The question is this: Has anyone on the net come up with an application suitable for microprocessors that the 32016 can't handle when fully debugged? Lots of people have come up with the exceptional cases, and I personally would love to see 32 bits of address, but it seems to me that the 32016 as is will satisfy the bulk of the demands which will be made of microcomputers in the next decade. Besides, if you are doing picture processing in a real way, money can't be an issue. Jon Shapiro