Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!tektronix!tekecs!bruce From: bruce@blue.blue.gwd.tek.com (Bruce Robertson) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: 80386 vs. 68030 Message-ID:Date: 7 Dec 88 17:11:38 GMT References: <788@stolaf.UUCP> <5436@cbmvax.UUCP> Sender: nobody@tekecs.TEK.COM Distribution: na Organization: Tektronix ITD, Wilsonville, OR Lines: 19 In-reply-to: daveh@cbmvax.UUCP's message of 5 Dec 88 20:32:19 GMT > Motorola's 68851 is nice from an MMU > function point of view; it can do practically anything you can think of. > But it always adds a wait state to a 68020 memory access. At this point in time, it's more interesting to compare the 68030 and the '386. The 68020 can be classified as obsolete for UNIX applications, since the built-in MMU in the 68030 doesn't add ANY delay (except of course when doing table walks), and a 68020/68851 combination will always be more expensive than just a 68030. The 68020 is still useful for non-MMU applications. -- Bruce Robertson bruce@blue.gwd.tek.com -- -- Bruce Robertson bruce@blue.gwd.tek.com