Received: from relay3.UU.NET (relay3.UU.NET [192.48.96.8]) by keeper.albany.net (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id TAA26688 for <dwarner@albany.net>; Wed, 13 Dec 1995 19:02:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: from garcia.com by relay3.UU.NET with SMTP
id QQztzr09680; Wed, 13 Dec 1995 18:54:29 -0500 (EST)
Received: from (localhost) by garcia.com (5.x/SMI-SVR4)
id AA24317; Wed, 13 Dec 1995 18:54:46 -0500
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 1995 18:54:46 -0500
Errors-To: dwarner@albany.net
Message-Id: <9512132349.AA24176@garcia.com>
Errors-To: dwarner@albany.net
Reply-To: lightwave@garcia.com
Originator: lightwave@garcia.com
Sender: lightwave@garcia.com
Precedence: bulk
From: c404266@mizzou1.missouri.edu (John Ferrel)
To: Multiple recipients of list <lightwave@garcia.com>
Subject: Re: 060 speeds
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Status: RO
X-Status:
> Motorola FPU experts I've talked with indicate that if code is 040-optimized
>then it is also 060-optimized. The 060 has the same strengths and weaknesses
>as the 040 FPU.
>
> Chris Hanson | Xenon@arcticus.burner.com | I've got friends in low latitudes!
C'mon, use your head, guys! Why the hell would they build an '060 if it
wouldn't do more MIPS & MFLOPS? Don't get me started....