I worked at DayStar for a while and wanted to set the record straight regarding the Turbo 060... As it turned out, the '060 was no faster than the '040 at comparable clock speeds, so we killed the product.

Click to expand...

But that begs the question: "what is the technical reason WHY the 060 was no faster than the 040 in Daystar's test?"

It is an especially important question when one reflects upon a later post in that same AppleFritter thread...

"Hands down, the 60 MHz m68060 in an Amiga 1200 running ShapeShifter beat the 80 MHz PowerMac 8100 a majority of the time in CPU intensive operations even when running PowerPC native code!"

If the Amiga 1200 comment is true, then such implies that either Daystar's didn't optimize their 060 test board to take full advantage of the 060 features, or something in MacOS at the time wasn't optimized for the 060, resulting in a zero improvement over the 040.