Re: 32-bit memory benchmark results for Inboard 386/AT card

Article View: comp.sys.intel

Article #1611

#1611

From: Mike McNally
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1987 14:05

18 lines
1511 bytes

In article <122@spdcc.COM> dyer@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer) writes:
 >               IBM PC/AT 8mhz          IBM PC/AT with Intel Inboard 386/AT
 >                                       at 16mhz, cache enabled
 >
 >                                       16-bit mem      32-bit mem
 >
 >Drystone 1.0   no reg  reg             no reg  reg     no reg  reg
 >               1278    1292            2293    2304    3429    3405
 >Drystone 1.1   1084    1094            1957    1963    2906    2893

Why is the with-register-variables time for the 32-bit version *slower*
than the without-register-variables time?  Isn't that sort-of strange?

-- 
Mike McNally, mercifully employed at Digital Lynx ---
    Where Plano Road the Mighty Flood of Forest Lane doth meet,
    And Garland fair, whose perfumed air flows soft about my feet...
uucp: {texsun,killer,infotel}!pollux!bobkat!m5 (214) 238-7474

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1176@bobkat.UUCP>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!infotel!pollux!bobkat!m5

References: <122@spdcc.COM>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!infotel!pollux!bobkat!m5
From: m5@bobkat.UUCP (Mike McNally )
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: 32-bit memory benchmark results for Inboard 386/AT card
Message-ID: <1176@bobkat.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 24-Jun-87 10:05:42 EDT
Article-I.D.: bobkat.1176
Posted: Wed Jun 24 10:05:42 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 26-Jun-87 06:31:58 EDT
References: <122@spdcc.COM>
Reply-To: m5@bobkat.UUCP (Mike McNally (Man from Mars))
Organization: Digital Lynx, Inc; Dallas, TX
Lines: 18

Reply to Parent Message