Article View: comp.arch
Article #2829Re: specmarks
From: Subash Shankar
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1989 17:57
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1989 17:57
20 lines
1257 bytes
1257 bytes
In article <4420015@hpihoah.HP.COM> fotland@hpihoah.HP.COM (David Fotland) writes: >You could define an architectural figure of merit as Specmark/Clock freq. I don't like this measure, since improved performance at the same processor clock frequency does not take into account the possible range of clock rates for the processor in question. Two processors may not be constructible at the same clock frequencies due to either processor architecture limitations, or memory speeds. I like Specmark/Memory Access Frequency better, though this has problems too, off course. --- Subash Shankar Honeywell Systems & Research Center voice: (612) 782 7558 US Snail: 3660 Technology Dr., Minneapolis, MN 55418 shankar@src.honeywell.com srcsip!shankar
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<36286@srcsip.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!srcsip!pompeii!shankarReferences:
<327@ssp1.idca.tds.philips.nl> <4420015@hpihoah.HP.COM>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!srcsip!pompeii!shankar From: shankar@SRC.Honeywell.COM (Subash Shankar) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: specmarks Message-ID: <36286@srcsip.UUCP> Date: 25 Oct 89 17:57:23 GMT References: <327@ssp1.idca.tds.philips.nl> <4420015@hpihoah.HP.COM> Sender: news@src.honeywell.COM Reply-To: shankar@src.honeywell.com (Subash Shankar) Organization: Honeywell Systems & Research Center Lines: 20