From: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net   
      
   In article <106uqki$36gll$4@dont-email.me>,   
   Thomas Koenig   wrote:   
   >Dan Cross  schrieb:   
   >> In article <44okQ.831008$QtA1.573001@fx16.iad>,   
   >> Scott Lurndal  wrote:   
   >>>[snip]   
   >>>We tend to be spoiled by modern process densities.   The   
   >>>VAX 11/780 was built using SSI logic chips, thus board   
   >>>space and backplane wiring were significant constraints   
   >>>on the logic designs of the era.   
   >>   
   >> Indeed.  I find this speculation about the VAX, kind of odd: the   
   >> existence of the 801 as a research project being used as an   
   >> existence proof to justify assertions that a pipelined RISC   
   >> design would have been "better" don't really hold up, when we   
   >> consider that the comparison is to a processor designed for   
   >> commercial applications on a much shorter timeframe.   
   >   
   >I disagree.  The 801 was a research project without much time   
   >pressure, and they simulated the machine (IIRC at the gate level)   
   >before they ever bulit one.  Plus, they developed an excellent   
   >compiler which implemented graph coloring.   
   >   
   >But IBM had zero interest in competition to their own /370 line,   
   >although the 801 would have brought performance improvements   
   >over that line.   
      
   I'm not sure what, precisely, you're disagreeing with.   
      
   I'm saying that the line of though that goes, "the 801 existed,   
   therefore a RISC VAX would have been better than the   
   architecture DEC ultimately produced" is specious, and the   
   conclusion does not follow.   
      
   	- Dan C.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)