[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 65020 CPU? Look this...
- Subject: Re: 65020 CPU? Look this...
- From: Eric Smith <eric@brouhaha.com>
- Date: 02 Mar 2005 17:13:49 -0800
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
- Organization: Eric Conspiracy Secret Labs
- References: <iXtTd.19341$D34.3690@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com> <oKBTd.175073$K7.106916@news-server.bigpond.net.au> <421f5eb5$1_1@news.vic.com> <1_3Ud.41736$wi2.31937@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com> <4223488c$1_1@news.vic.com> <q5adndT5WJr0477fRVn-vw@comcast.com> <4224b248$1_2@news.vic.com> <9_-dnZ6HxJg1VrnfRVn-2A@comcast.com> <42264543$1_2@news.vic.com> <KUsVd.60333$iC4.889@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com>
- Sender: eric@ruckus.brouhaha.com
- User-agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3
- Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.sys.apple2:9012
"Bryan Parkoff" <nospam@nospam.com> writes:
> I would predict that 6502 CPU can run at 2GHz
> which it would be much faster than Intel Pentium 2GHz and other processors
> because 6502 is only focused in the cycle performance. I would claim that
> 6502 CPU is the best design with clever optimization however Intel always
> does not do their good job for CPU design.
The Pentium 4 and Pentium M execute on average more than one instruction
per clock cycle. How is your hypothetical 2 GHz 6502 going to even
come close to that?
Intel's processors don't do nearly as much work per clock cycle as AMD
processors, but they run at higher clock rates, so the actual system
performance is similar, though AMD has a slight edge for some things and
Intel for others. Although I personally prefer AMD, and it does appear
that Intel had some missteps last year, on the whole I think you're very
much mistaken in your claim that Intel does not do a good job of CPU
design.
I've been a 6502 user and fan since 1976 (though I like the 6809 even
better), but stretching it to 32 bits and running it faster is NOT going
to put it into the same league as a Pentium 4 or Athlon 64 by any
stretch of the imagination.