3 ms·
It was probably not dramatic if it was slower at all, there is a reason so many of those workstation processors died out in the 90s.
by jandrese 2y ago
It was probably not dramatic if it was slower at all, there is a reason so many of those workstation processors died out in the 90s.
- stare_spb 2y agoWell, with a performance of ~22-25 MIPS, PRISM@18Mhz was about 2.5 times faster than original 25Mhz 486DX and roughly on par with 1992 486DX2 66Mhz.
- rasz 2y ago2 MFLOPS for 33MHz and 4 MFLOPS for 2/66MHz 486.
- actionfromafar 2y agoI at first thought a 486 was probably faster, but that Apollo CPU has 64 bit data path apparently. It might have been a beast. I didn't even know Apollo used anything but Motorola 68k CPUs.
- bee_rider 2y agoI wonder if it might have been a beast at some tasks, but not others? I imagine these chips might have been optimized for throughput on well-suited and carefully tuned programs, where the compilers could be convinced to put out good code (since it was apparently something like a VLIW).
- hulitu 2y ago> I wonder if it might have been a beast at some tasks, but not others? Domain OS was a multiuser, multitasking OS running on a Motorola 68020 with 4 Megs of RAM with distributed filesystem and diskless clients which did swap over the network. Ah, and with versioning filesystem. And Spice simulations were resonably fast compared to a 386/40 running Pspice on MS-DOS.