this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2025
413 points (99.3% liked)

Technology

66687 readers
4216 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 80 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (2 children)

In broad terms, that seems to put it about on par with an Intel 386 chip from 1985

At 24 MHz, it's actually about 4-6 times faster than a full fledged 33 MHz i80386DX with 10 times as many transistors back in the day.
It's absolutely insane that i386 remained the standard with its inferior high latency design.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acorn_Archimedes

exhibiting BASIC language performance ten times faster than a newly introduced 80386-based computer

That was an 8MHz Arm system, and it was commonly recognized as being clearly faster than a 33MHz i80386DX!
In fact the 8036 was so inefficient at 33MHz it couldn't even beat the speed of a 16 MHz 80286 on 16 bit code!!
Mips, Alpha, Motorola, Sparc and finally Arm were all better, but they weren't backed by IBM, and the availability of clones made the PC relatively cheap. But basically everything else was better than Intel.

Unfortunately Arm also lacked a math co-processor, so for tasks that were heavy on FP calculations, an i386 with co-processor was superior.
Also Arm was unable to sell them cheap enough to capture at least a niche market. (Apart from education in UK)
And for the hobbyist an Amiga was way cheaper, and had powerful graphics and sound chips.

[–] FauxPseudo@lemmy.world 10 points 17 hours ago

Thank you. This kind of information was exactly what I wanted in the comments.

As a person who started on a 286 this seems blazing fast. Just wish it had ports for power, HDMI and USB

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 12 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Now you got me remembering my 2MHz "big board" Z80 computer I put together in the 80s from a kit. First computer I ever owned. On first power-up nothing seemed to happen, then I turned up the monitor brightness and a choir of angels sang.

[–] dojan@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago