🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <C0E0zB.DwG@inews.Intel.COM> rskinner@mipos2.intel.com (Rod Skinner) writes:
>Another interesting article comparing the Intel486 SX processor and the
>Cyrix SLC is in InfoWorld December 21 page 48 "Reviews/Product
>Comparisons: 25-MHz 486 Notebooks".  InfoWorld seems to come to the
>conclusion that the Intel486 SX processors are 35% to 40% FASTER than
>the Cyrix parts.  They use several examples but the most powerful is two
>machines from TI: TravelMate 4000 WinSX/25 and the TravelMate WinSLC.
>Both weigh 6 pounds with battery.  Similarly configured machines yield
>SYSmark92 results of 75.93 (Intel486 SX) and 47.23 (Cyrix).  They
>indicate that Cyrix system "posted a SYSmark92 close to 38 percent
>slower than its 486SX/25 sibling."
>
>SYSMark92 suite is a standard set of applications that are stimulated in
>a repeatable manner using a set of commands that the BAPCo organization
>developed after talking to 5000 users of these applications.  The
>applications include spreadsheets (123, Excel, Quattro), word processors
>(WordPerfect, WFW), data base (Paradox, dBase), presentation software,
>graphics applications (Harvard), software development (MSC, Borland C).
>These are the things most PC users regularly use and if not the
>composite SYSMark92 metric, then the individual catagory metrics should
>provide one with the ability to predict system performance on their
>workload.
>
>rod
...
>
>Rod Skinner				I speak for myself only.
>Intel Corp
>2200 Mission College Blvd RN4-21          PH (408) 765-4474
>Santa Clara, CA 95052                     FAX (408) 765-4920

Comparing 486SX performance to 486SLC performance is an apple-vs-orange
comparison - the 486SX has a 32 bit bus, and the 486SLC has a 16 bit bus.

A more balanced comparison would be between a 486SX and a 486DLC at the
same clock speed - and I would expect the 486SX to win by about 10% at
the same clock speed.

I am surprised Rod Skinner did not notice the discrepancy.

Bill