🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.sys.dec
Article #1337

Re: Alpha benchmarks

#1337
From: jackson
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 19:11
54 lines
2967 bytes
In article <1992Aug12.160844.2486@nosc.mil>, lem@nosc.mil (Lemuel L. Davis) writes:


>>Has anyone run or had DEC run any becnhmarks on Alpha systems?   I 
>>have just seen some..... etc, etc.


Before I start, let me say that those who have been given access to Alpha
systems (both VMS and OSF/1) in the porting centers and as field test sites
have signed agreements regarding releasing performance information. The 
reason that we have those agreements in place is that those who have access
to the systems are told what they can expect from today's systems as well
as what they can expect in the future.  When information is passed on, those
who receive it may not know the condition of the machines, and thus may get
the wrong impression (like you have)


There are four things that are all in various states on various machines
around the world at porting centers.  All have serious performance implications
at this point. These are:

Hardware:	Many of the early systems had slower clocks and slower 
		I/O systems due to early prototype chips being used.  This
		will of course slow the systems down

OS Software:	Both VMS and OSF/1 are early releases of the OS, and thus
		still have many debugging features "turned on" in the OS.  
		Along with that, some of the OS code has been compiled with
		compilers that are not final, optomizing versions that generate
		less than optimal code.  

Compilers:	Once the OS is built, the application has to use those same
		compilers to generate the application code.  These again are 
		less than optimal at this point.

PALcode:	The low level "microcode" for some of the Priv'd OS internals
		has yet to be fully optimized.  This will also have an 
		impact if many priv'd OS calls are made.


Given these, it isn't surprising that any benchmark run today will perform
less than expected. This is why one has to sign an agreement saying that they
will not publish or distribute any results one may get.  

I realize that the interest in Alpha performance is great, and there is a 
desire to "scoop" what Digital will announce in Alpha products. Hang in 
there, Alpha is coming and it *IS* fast!

William Jackson
Alpha Workstation Marketing Manager
Digital Equipment Corporation
146 Main Street
Maynard, MA 01754
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1992Aug14.191129.12516@engage.pko.dec.com>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!sun-barr!decwrl!deccrl!news.crl.dec.com!pa.dec.com!nntpd2.cxo.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!engage.pko.dec.com!pravda.enet.dec.com!jackson
References: <1992Aug12.160844.2486@nosc.mil> <1992Aug13.093121.4012@rdg.dec.com> <1992Aug13.115706.5652@cl.cam.ac.uk>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.sys.dec
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!sun-barr!decwrl!deccrl!news.crl.dec.com!pa.dec.com!nntpd2.cxo.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!engage.pko.dec.com!pravda.enet.dec.com!jackson
From: jackson@pravda.enet.dec.com ()
Subject: Re: Alpha benchmarks
Message-ID: <1992Aug14.191129.12516@engage.pko.dec.com>
Keywords: alpha, benchmarks
Sender: newsdaemon@engage.pko.dec.com (USENET News Daemon)
Reply-To: jackson@pravda.enet.dec.com ()
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
References: <1992Aug12.160844.2486@nosc.mil> <1992Aug13.093121.4012@rdg.dec.com> <1992Aug13.115706.5652@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 19:11:29 GMT
Lines: 57