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

Article View: comp.sys.intel

Article #1612

#1612

From: Steve Dyer
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1987 21:37

11 lines
1243 bytes

>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?

Sure is, but that's what I got.  I'm not sure why; perhaps it has to
do with alignment of the variables (note that the results came from
the SAME objects--the only difference was whether the 286 program
was running in 16-bit memory or 32-bit memory).  I'll be posting 
XENIX 386 results in a day or two; stay tuned...
Steve Dyer
dyer@harvard.HARVARD.EDU
dyer@spdcc.COM aka {harvard,wanginst,ima,ihnp4,bbn,halleys}!spdcc!dyer

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1031@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!husc6!bloom-beacon!dyer

References: <122@spdcc.COM> <1176@bobkat.UUCP>

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!husc6!bloom-beacon!dyer
From: dyer@athena.mit.edu (Steve Dyer)
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: <1031@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Date: Mon, 29-Jun-87 17:37:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: bloom-be.1031
Posted: Mon Jun 29 17:37:04 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 1-Jul-87 00:48:14 EDT
References: <122@spdcc.COM> <1176@bobkat.UUCP>
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: dyer@menelaus.UUCP (Steve Dyer)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lines: 11

Reply to Parent Message