3 ms·

Raw clocks matter far less than architectural efficiency and instruction throughput. A 16MHz 386 was around 2MIPS, around the same as a 12MHz 68000. A 40MHz 6

Raw clocks matter far less than architectural efficiency and instruction throughput. A 16MHz 386 was around 2MIPS, around the same as a 12MHz 68000. A 40MHz 68040 was around 40MIPS, a 66MHz 468DX2 was around 25MIPS. The 68040 also had significantly faster floating point performance. It's slightly insane that the 68000 (released 1979) was comparable in performance to a VAX 11/780 (released 1977) - for a tiny fraction of the cost.

justapassenger 3y ago
They’re less meaningful, but they’re number. And numbers are easy to compare, with ignoring all the context.
- mistrial9 3y ago
  lots of marketing relies on superficial understanding by the viewer, partial attention and mistaking good looks for other qualities. In other words, yes, agree.. look at the results in the markets.
  - mistrial9 3y ago
    one part of this has a formal name! -- The "anchoring effect" names a tendency to be influenced by irrelevant numbers. Shown greater/lesser numbers, experimental subjects gave greater/lesser responses. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring_(cognitive_bias) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring_(cognitive_bias)
segmondy 3y ago
The public didn't know this. Regular John and Jane belive that higher Mhz means faster.
qubex 3y ago
MIPS, which at about that time was derided as “Meaningless Integer Performance Statistic” by those who moved in the supercomputing (now ‘HPC’) circles.
cmrdporcupine 3y ago
That said, 68000 interrupt responsiveness wasn't great at all when compared the 8-bit systems it was replacing. An Atari ST is positively insane in the # of cycles it took to respond to an interrupt vs e.g. the C64 which was designed by some of the same people. Wider bus, more registers, different design constraints. The 68000 was great for doing what you mention: bringing VAX-like tech to the masses. Looking back I don't think it was a great "home computer" processor, and not great for games and the like, either. In anyways, I'd say by the mid-90s the 68k architecture could not keep up with x86 because Motorola just stopped investing in it.

justapassenger 3y ago

They’re less meaningful, but they’re number. And numbers are easy to compare, with ignoring all the context.

mistrial9 3y ago
lots of marketing relies on superficial understanding by the viewer, partial attention and mistaking good looks for other qualities. In other words, yes, agree.. look at the results in the markets.
- mistrial9 3y ago
  one part of this has a formal name! -- The "anchoring effect" names a tendency to be influenced by irrelevant numbers. Shown greater/lesser numbers, experimental subjects gave greater/lesser responses. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring_(cognitive_bias) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring_(cognitive_bias)

segmondy 3y ago

The public didn't know this. Regular John and Jane belive that higher Mhz means faster.

qubex 3y ago

MIPS, which at about that time was derided as “Meaningless Integer Performance Statistic” by those who moved in the supercomputing (now ‘HPC’) circles.

cmrdporcupine 3y ago

That said, 68000 interrupt responsiveness wasn't great at all when compared the 8-bit systems it was replacing. An Atari ST is positively insane in the # of cycles it took to respond to an interrupt vs e.g. the C64 which was designed by some of the same people. Wider bus, more registers, different design constraints. The 68000 was great for doing what you mention: bringing VAX-like tech to the masses. Looking back I don't think it was a great "home computer" processor, and not great for games and the like, either. In anyways, I'd say by the mid-90s the 68k architecture could not keep up with x86 because Motorola just stopped investing in it.