From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Aug 25 11:21:51 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [209.157.86.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A363152D6 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 1999 11:21:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id LAA14122; Wed, 25 Aug 1999 11:20:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 11:20:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <199908251820.LAA14122@apollo.backplane.com> To: "Leif Neland" Cc: "Gregory Sutter" , Subject: Re: Sv: K6/3 on 3.2-STABLE - PROBLEM SOLVED References: <19990824132943.B11107@proxydev.inktomi.com> <199908242133.OAA18621@apollo.backplane.com> <19990824154432.A21013@proxydev.inktomi.com> <19990825020108.B20512@forty-two.egroups.net> <007c01beef22$859036a0$0e00a8c0@neland.dk> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG : :Back around 1980, I overclocked my 5MHz z80 to 6MHz. It worked without problems, except that for-next loops in comal didn't exit as expected. That was also reproducible... : :Leif In the early 90's I regularly ran 10 MHz 68000's at 20 MHz (which was about the limit the dynamic ram at the time could handle). When motorola started phasing out the DIP version of the 68000 after many years of good service, one of their big customers noted that Motorola had updated the process many times but had never updated the timing specs during virtually the entire life of the product, and wanted to know how fast the chip could actually be run. So Motorola tested it. I believe the 12.5 MHz spec'd chip tested to 80 MHz. Not bad! -Matt Matthew Dillon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message