Retrochallenge, 2005

[Patrick Finnegan]

On Tuesday 14 June 2005 16:56, Ronald Wayne wrote:
> I'm a bit confused here.  Can you please explain what you mean?

He's saying that it takes very little effort to make a Sun 3/60 do all 
of the protocols.  Even with a 2x multiplier, it takes very little 
effort.  With something like a 3/60, you'll get the best points:effort 
ratio of anything that falls in your list.

On anything with a "3" multiplier, it'll be very difficult to get even 
just 1 protocol working.  Thus, a lot of effort for few points.

I think your "3" multiplier maybe needs to be changed to a "5" or "6" 
multiplier at least..  Perhaps get rid of the "1" multiplier machines 
and change the "2" multiplier to be a "1", and the "3" could then stay 
about where it is. :)

> On 6/14/05, Tim Riker <Tim at rikers.org> wrote:
> > Ronald Wayne wrote:
> > > The Sun 3 is based upon a 68020, so the multiplier is 2.
> > >
> > > On 6/14/05, Al Kossow <aek at bitsavers.org> wrote:
> > >>looking at the points/multipier a Sun 3/60 running <mumble>BSD
> > >> will be the
> > >>
> > >>knee of the effort/points curve.
> >
> > hence the "knee" unless you know of a system that can do the same
> > on one of the 3 based processors. The point being that doing all
> > the protocols on a 2 based system is fairly easy. And doing even
> > one of them on a 3 is a challenge.
> >
> > --
> > Tim Riker - http://Rikers.org/ - TimR at Debian.org
> > Embedded Linux Technologist - http://eLinux.org/
> > BZFlag maintainer - http://BZFlag.org/ - for fun!

-- 
Purdue University Research Computing ---  http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/
The Computer Refuge                  ---  http://computer-refuge.org