🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1256@marlin.NOSC.MIL> aburto@marlin.nosc.mil.UUCP (Alfred A. Aburto) writes:
| While your comparative results are very interesting, and useful as a point
| of reference, I must throw in some words of caution.  That is, the individual
| results are highly dependent upon the machine code generating efficiency of
| the various compilers used.

Yes, your point is well taken.  However, it is usually quite hard to
isolate these kind of things when benchmarking real systems; about all
you can say is System X, using compiler Y achieved these results on
benchmark Z.

| I know for example the 68030 @ 25 MHz 
| coupled with 'the right stuff' (hardware and compiler) can achieve roughly
| 10K (V1.1) Dhrystones/sec (as compared to the 5.5K result posted).

Right.  This is why I requested the benchmarks from Intel in the first
place.  They also showed the Am29000 running much slower than it
could, so I re-ran the benchmarks on a different board to present
corrected results.  I reported these, along with Intel's original
i960KA, i960CA, and 68030 results, but I didn't feel that it was my
place to also present new numbers for the 68030 -- I invite Motorola
to do so.

Our benchmark philosophy has been to include results for common
systems (i.e. VAX 11/780 running 4.3bsd, and Sun 3/60), for two reasons:

	1) The results can be easily verified by 3rd parties

	2) More people have direct experience with these systems and
	   have a good feel for their performance levels.


	-- Tim Olson
	Advanced Micro Devices
	(tim@amd.com)