home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- >>>>> "John" == John de Bruin <j.bruin@auckland.ac.nz> writes:
- In article <310F5CC3.5BCB@auckland.ac.nz> John de Bruin <j.bruin@auckland.ac.nz> writes:
-
-
- John> I was reading in here about Motorola erroneously saying some
- John> of its 040 chips run at 80MHz when their true speed is 40MHz
- John> and ditto 33/66 MHz systems etc.
-
- News propogation is funny. I haven't seen anyone claim that Motorola
- has erroneously said anything, but just because I haven't seen it
- doesn't mean it wasn't said. However, I said something similar, so
- I'm going to clarify what I said. Here's my original statement:
-
- "It's a little tricky, since some people call what you, I and
- Motorola call a 40 MHz CPU a 80 MHz CPU and to them, a 33 MHz
- becomes a 66 MHz CPU. At ARDI, we never use the inflated
- numbers (even though it makes us look better), but when we say
- 25 MHz 68040, some people will think we're talking about a
- theoretical 12.5 MHz CPU. Argh."
-
- So my claim is that Motorola, myself and the person I was replying to
- (Eric Bennett) would call the CPU that is in a Quadra 610 a 25 MHz
- CPU. Eric's terminology was clear from his letter, I'm familiar with
- my own terminology and I derived Motorola's terminology from page 12-1
- of MC68040UM/AD "MC68040 32-bit microprocessor manual" (c) 1989.
- Specifically, page 12-1 says:
-
- "The following table provides ordering information pertaining to the
- package type frequency, temperature and Motorola order number for the
- MC68040.
-
- Package Type Frequency Temperature Order Number
- (MHz)
-
- Pin Grid Array 25.0 TBD MC68040R25
- R Suffix"
-
- John> Why is this different from clock doubling as in the 486DX/2
- John> CPU?
-
- It is different because Motorola chose to call their original mc68040
- CPU a 25 MHz CPU. I personally wouldn't care if they had chosen to
- call it a 50 MHz CPU, in fact, it would make our own product look more
- impressive, since we could say that a 75 MHz DX4 can run some Mac
- programs as quickly as a 50 MHz 68040. Heck, let them call it a 500
- MHz part and we'd then be able to say that a 75 MHz DX4 can run some
- Mac programs as quickly as a 500 MHz 68040. However, it was
- Motorola's choice, and I can understand their desire to call it what
- they did.
-
- John> I understand that most 68040s have two clock signals a PCLK
- John> and a BCLK, the BCLK runs at 1/2 the speed of the PCLK.
-
- John> And the BCLK is used for all bus timing, whereas the PCLK is
- John> used for internal processor logic timing.
-
- John> Now as far as I can tell the only difference between this
- John> and the DX/2, is that the DX/2 only has one clock and uses a
- John> clock 2x multiplier to derive the internal processor
- John> speed. Why do the two clocks on the '040 _not_ have the same
- John> effect as clock doubling?
-
- I understand your point. If you read my original claim in context you
- will see that my gripe is that when you have two different standards
- for what N MHz means *for the same chip*, then things get confusing.
- We choose to use the original meaning for two reasons:
-
- a 25 MHz 68040 is roughly comparable to a 25 MHz 80486
-
- we'd rather err on the side of people thinking Executor is
- slower than it is and be pleasantly surprised than to use
- the inflated number and have people be disappointed
-
- John> Can the two run out of sync for instance?
-
- John> Bye...
-
- --Cliff
- ctm@ardi.com
-
-