From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,8e0fcf9e7d370ccc
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Fixed-point question
Date: 1995/04/07
Message-ID: <dewar.797306016@gnat>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 100070426
references: <3li7ec$k37@butch.lmsc.lockheed.com> <dewar.797192058@gnat>
 	<3m43ot$grt@butch.lmsc.lockheed.com> <EACHUS.95Apr7192319@spectre.mitre.org>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1995-04-07T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On the Pentium, floating-point multiplication is faster than integer
multiplication, and this is a common pattern on modern RISC chips, where
the floating-point multiply is pipelined, but it is not considered worth
pipelining the integer multiply (and also, as I pointed out, you usually
have an extra shift for the fixed-point multiply).

As has been pointed out, there may be considerations of space in using
fixed-point, but there will be a time cost in the typical case.