Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.arch |
| Subject | Re: transistor count |
| Date | 2011-11-13 22:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <9iatrgFheeU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <j9pdgc$ah4$1@reader1.panix.com> |
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 21:40:28 +0000, Joe keane wrote: > most efficient: Pentium III AMD K5 Motorola 6809 MOS Technology 6502 > Pentium II AMD K6 > > least efficient: Dual-core Itanium 2 Itanium 2 Is that performance/transistor on some particular scale? I would be surprised if the 6809 was really higher on the list than the 6502, but it would depend on the benchmark. (Difficult to imagine a benchmark that can cover that scale sensibly...) I'd also be surprised if the ARM2 wasn't on the first list somewhere (the first, cacheless one that clocked the core according to whether the instruction fetch was doing a RAS or a CAS-only access.) Cheers, -- Andrew
Back to comp.arch | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
transistor count jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2011-11-13 21:40 +0000
Re: transistor count Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2011-11-13 22:15 +0000
Re: transistor count del cecchi <delcecchi@gmail.com> - 2011-11-13 20:52 -0600
csiph-web