Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cwjcc!mailrus!um-math!hyc From: hyc@math.lsa.umich.edu (Howard Chu) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Re: Is a faster ST in the cards? Keywords: speed RAM ASIC Message-ID: <508@stag.math.lsa.umich.edu> Date: 9 Dec 88 01:45:00 GMT References: <7107@chinet.chi.il.us> Sender: usenet@math.lsa.umich.edu Reply-To: hyc@math.lsa.umich.edu (Howard Chu) Organization: University of Michigan Math Dept., Ann Arbor Lines: 45 UUCP-Path: {mailrus,umix}!um-math!hyc In article <7107@chinet.chi.il.us> saj@chinet.chi.il.us (Stephen Jacobs) writes: %I'm just stirring it up here. If you read electronics ads, you've noticed %that the price premium for faster rather than slower memory chips isn't what %it used to be. Similarly, I can easily remember when an 8 MHz 68000 used to %fetch more than the price of a 16 MHz 68000 today. My understanding of the %guts of an ST isn't what it might be, but it seems that it would essentially %require faster versions of the custom chips and a relatively small change in %the handling of video refresh to make a top-to-bottom 16 MHz ST that Atari %could make a profit selling at a price I'd consider paying (yeah, I'm glossing %over FCC approval--how much of a problem is it? I dunno). % Maybe the Atari contingent might consider this a suggestion. The ST seems %to match up in raw crunch power roughly even with an AT-class machine with %20-30% faster clock speed. The magazines suggest that the up-and-coming home %computer is a ~20 MHz AT clone (I wouldn't want one, but so what?). A faster %ST would line up nicely there, with the (if and when) 68030 box leaning heavily %on the 80386-based office class of machines. % I'm greedy. I don't wanna lose that cpu speed to wait states ANYWHERE. Well, Megabyte Computers in Texas has yet to deliver on their promised Turbo16 upgrade. Now, two months after their expected release, I have to believe that it's not as easy as all that. Unfortunate. I was really looking forward to it. (Y'know, a Mega-4 with a 68000 running at 16 MHz, with 68881 [or 68882] math coprocessor, would probably outclass a Sun 3/50. Throw in the 19 inch mono screen and it would be a very very slick workstation.) I think you're being too conservative re: the 68030. Why restrict 'em to office machines? A slower-clocked 68030 would make a pretty decent home workhorse, eh? (And to think, a few months ago I would've given anything for a 25Mhz 68020...) Lotsa nice dreams. I heard, don't remember where, that an ST with a 16 MHz CPU could not be used with the blitter chip. (I'd really like to remember where I heard this, 'cause I'd like to know who's got an ST working with a 16 MHz CPU!!) That'd be awful depressing, if true. (Of course, SoftTrek's TurboST would still work. Gee, 200% CPU speedup, oughta mean 400% faster textblits! Wow! Maybe I shouldn't have sold my 1040 after all...) I heartily agree with that last line. I wanna run flat out, top speed, no obstacles... Gimme faster chips! (Yeehah!) -- / /_ , ,_. Howard Chu / /(_/(__ University of Michigan / Computing Center College of LS&A ' Unix Project Information Systems