Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!ames!elroy!smeagol!jplgodo!wlbr!scgvaxd!ashtate!dbase!csun!aeusesef
From: aeusesef@csun.UUCP (Sean Eric Fagan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.nsc.32k
Subject: Re: NS32000 Processor
Message-ID: <697@csun.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 24-Jul-87 21:56:29 EDT
Article-I.D.: csun.697
Posted: Fri Jul 24 21:56:29 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 28-Jul-87 02:00:27 EDT
References: <334@forbrk.UUCP> <1026@killer.UUCP> <10192@amdahl.amdahl.com> <4497@nsc.nsc.com> <10427@amdahl.amdahl.com>
Reply-To: aeusesef@csun.UUCP (Sean Eric Fagan)
Organization: California State University, Northridge
Lines: 47

In article <10427@amdahl.amdahl.com> chongo@amdahl.UUCP (Landon Curt Noll) writes:
 >In article <4497@nsc.nsc.com> grenley@nsc.UUCP (George Grenley) writes:
 > >Landon, Iguess we all know by now that you're not too fond of NSC.  So be it.
 > >Nevertheless you should know that CPU architecture elegance is NOT the primary
 > >reason to pick a CPU.  Look at the number of people who buy Amdahls - surely
 > >it doesn't represent the optimum 32 bit architecture....
[Lot's and lot's of stuff deleted because of stupd requirements]
 >
 >  * Regarding Amdahls:  (allow me to substitute mainframes to avoid discussions
 >    of ``my mainframe is better then your mainframe'')
 >
 >	Mainframes often trail the high end state of the art by a number
 >	of years.  Their target is NOT people who want ``Superconducting
 >	Nitrogen Cooled Optical connected thingy-ma-gigs''.  Factors such
 >	as MTBF, Price/performance, Compat-ness with other equipment,
 >	environmental factors, etc. are important.  Mainframes won't spout 
 >	the state-of-the-art in hardware parts.  Even so, mainframes
 >	do represent the state-of-the-art in performance, MTBF, and 
 >	price/performance for a number of situations.
I've got to agree here.  The 32k is a nice chip, allowing me (who likes to
program in assembly language -- I'm seeking treatment though 8-)) to choose
among a wide variety of instructions.  Let me ammend that:  a wide variety
of *SLOW* instructions.  At work, I work on Control Data Cybers, preferrably
the 170/760, the fastenst machine (other than the Cray) I've ever worked on.
(For those who don't know, the Cybers were designed by Seymore (sp?) Cray
while he worked for CDC;  they are similar to the Cray's except for lack of
vectors.)  Besides being a RISC machine, the 170/760 has wires on the
inside.  Lot's of them.  Almost nothing else on the back, in fact, and there
isn't a single silicon chip in the entire thing.  (It's enough to give a
repair technician nightmares.)  But, even though using old technology, this
thing will outperform 90% of the machines in existance today, and all of the
machines when it was new.  (But I hate RISC!)
 >
 >chongo  /\oo/\

 -----

 Sean Eric Fagan          Office of Computing/Communications Resources
 (213) 852 5742           Suite 2600
 1GTLSEF@CALSTATE.BITNET  5670 Wilshire Boulevard
                          Los Angeles, CA 90036
{litvax, rdlvax, psivax, hplabs, ihnp4}!csun!{aeusesef,titan!eectrsef}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My employers do not endorse my   | "I may be slow,  but I'm not  stupid.
opinions,  and, at least in my   |  I can count up to five *real* good."
preference  of Unix,  heartily   |      The Great Skeeve
disagree.                        |      (Robert Asprin)