Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!cunixb.cc.columbia.edu!es1
From: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita)
Subject: Re: AMIGA
Message-ID: <1991May5.090207.6997@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Sender: usenet@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (The Network News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
Reply-To: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita)
Organization: Columbia University
References: <1991Jan11.225935.26086@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <lpbG-s+=1@cs.psu.edu> <andrey.673399369@beyond>
Date: Sun, 5 May 1991 09:02:07 GMT

In article <andrey.673399369@beyond> andrey@beyond.caltech.edu (Andre Yew) writes:
>melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes:
>
>
>>In article <1991Jan11.225935.26086@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes:
>
>>Yeah, the 56001 is only a 10mip DSP, give me something better!  CD
>>quality sound isn't enough.
>
>	And the 96001 is only a 13.33 MIPS chip.  You can get CD quality sound
>from almost anything -- it's not a function of the processor chip you're
>using, especially since it's not doing any sampling.  An IBM-clone could do
>16-bit, 44.1 kHz sampling.
>
	As I understand it the 56001 is an integer chip and the
96001 is a floating-point chip. That is the primary difference.
Ray-tracing is certainly helped by the 96001, but digitized sound
certainly wouldn't be.a


>>-Mike
>						Andre
>
>--
>Andre Yew  andrey@through.cs.caltech.edu (131.215.131.169)


	-- Ethan

"Brain! Brain! What is Brain?"
