From: terje.mathisen@tmsw.no   
      
   John Dallman wrote:   
   > In article <20260107133424.00000e99@yahoo.com>, already5chosen@yahoo.com   
   > (Michael S) wrote:   
   >   
   >> I already asked you couple of years ago how fast do want binary128   
   >> in order to consider it fast enough.   
   >> IIRC, you either avoided the answer completely or gave totally   
   >> unrealistic answer like "the same as binary64".   
   >> May be, nobody bites because with non-answers or answers like that   
   >> nobody thinks that you are serious?   
   >   
   > I don't know much about hardware design. What is realistic for hardware   
   > binary128?   
      
   Sub-10 cycles fmul/fadd/fsub seems very doable?   
      
   Mitch?   
      
   Terje   
      
   --   
   -    
   "almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)