CompuServe Thread

#How to count slots

8 messages in this thread
#99894From: Black Belt SystemsApr 25, 1990 5:05 PM
Hm. Some good observations. Two things, tho – first, the nest video upgrade you will be able to add to the machine doesn't take any slots, and offers mucho comnpatability, so no worries there. :^) The other thing is that the '030 is NOT an "obsolete cpu" and the 040 is virtually unavailable as of yet. What you could have said (and I'll say for you) is that the 25 Mhz speed is a big dissapointment – there were 55 Mhz parts available from Motorola almost 2 years ago – and I'm sure you didn't miss the 40 Mhz Mac II on last months Byte cover – a clear indication that using the technology is no problem, since the Mac has always been last in the technology race. Ben Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
#99924From: RON TROYApr 25, 1990 7:17 PM
Granted that a 40mhz 030 is not really obsolete. As I said in an earlier message, I can see a 25mhz as the low end version, and a 40 or 50 as the high end while waiting for the 040. CBM had to know that Apple was going to release a 40mhz unit, and with the 50 mhz version of the 030 announced many moons ago could have done that or the 40. A 3000 is actually noticably slower then some 2000 with the 33mhz accellerators installed with decent ram. Ron
#100012From: Black Belt SystemsApr 25, 1990 10:31 PM
That may not be so, Ron – there are some other hardware differences that make the 3000 much faster than the 2000 series. Particularly 32 bit chip-ram access. I agree that the clock rate of the CPU is a dissapointment. Ben Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
#100088From: RON TROYApr 26, 1990 6:54 AM
But note that the video is at 16 bits according to the Byte article. Ron
#100191From: JAMES D. WILLIAMSApr 26, 1990 10:06 PM
According to what I heard last night, the video is in 32 bit memory 'mapped' into 16 bit memory (actually, chip memory is 32 bit mapped into 16.) –Eet–
#100575From: John DraperApr 28, 1990 4:45 PM
So? The CHIP bus is accessed at two widths; 16 bits by the custom chips, and 32 bits by the CPU. This results in a net speedup when using CHIP ram. Why don't you hold off on the 3000 bashing until a few 3000s owners have had the chance to add memory to make the comparisons valid, and have reported the results? As it is, you are indulging in your usual sport of comparing apples to bananas, and using misinformation as a basis for complaint.
#100295From: Gabe J. FederApr 27, 1990 7:01 AM
There's no reason that Commodore HAD to know that Apple was coming out with a fast CPU. Does Macy's tell Gimbel's (God, how old that saying got in the past few years!)? –Gabe
#100111From: John BonoApr 26, 1990 11:01 AM
However, megahertz always make for good publicity. If the 3000 was 40 mhz, it would be solidly in workstation territory in terms of performance, and be "as fast" as a IIfx.(Though we all know better) John