| ??? 05/05/09 23:27 Read: times |
#165083 - Those aren't my claims! Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Per Westermark said:
Richard said:
No ... it's 1 MIPS at 12 MHz. That's what 12-clocker means. Yes, but your post said that it was 8.1 times faster than a 12-clocker at the same clock speed. So at 12 MHz, it would run at 8.1 MIPS. Surely you know that's not MY claim. You posted a note that the claim was 8.1 times faster than the original 8051 at same clock frequency. That means that it needs about 1.5 clocks/instruction. Surely you know that's not MY claim. You posted a note that the claim was that it could run at up to 300MHz. Surely you know that's not MY claim. So, in conclusion, it would manage about 300*8.1/12 or 202 MIPS. Surely you know that's not MY claim. In fact, it's not even THEIR claim. You're the only one who's made that assertion. It was your claim that would have a maximum speed similar to a 25MHz one-clocker, but a 25MHz one-clocker would manage 25 MIPS, while the earlier two claims would indicate a way higher top speed.
So I did ask how you made your computations, since your computations did not match the original claims you posted. No need to tell me what a 12-clocker is. What I pointed out, I thought, was that the mfg's claims don't match their own claims. I don't know why you think you should add even more unsubstantiated claims. RE |
