*SIGH*

IN order to make use of any advantages that a dual processor SS10 might have 
(I'll ignore the "ought to be" comment for now) you'd have to have a kernel 
with true multi-threading capability and that isn't an issue when we talk
about Netbsd, is it?

On Thu, Jun 01, 2000 at 12:51:21AM -0400, Dave McGuire wrote:
> On May 31, Len Rose wrote:
> > SS10 is dog slow. The stock processors were 40mhz. I believe the slowest SS5
> > was 75mhz. Most of the SS10's you see being sold are also single processor.
> 
>   *sigh*
> 
>   An SS10 with an SM41 (40MHz) will easily outperform, in most
> situations, a 70MHz SS5.  I've said it dozens of times before, and
> I'll say it again: clock speed is NOT a measure of computer
> performance.  Anyone technical enough to be on this list in the
> first place should darned well know that.
> 
>   About those "stock processors"...are we only talking about "stock"
> processors?  I don't know anyone who's running an SS10 for historical
> value...they're just not that old.  So I doubt anyone is really
> interested in maintaining "stock" configurations.  Which goes on to
> suggest that many SS10 machines (including three in this house) have
> SM71 or better processors in them.
> 
> 
>                -Dave McGuire