🚀 go-pugleaf

On Byte benchmarks, my 7100/66 ( 601 PPC at 66 MHz, main bus 33 MHz)
runs at between 0.90 and 0.95 on integer benchmarks depending on
the level of optimization, on which the Dell XPS P-90 (Pentium 90 MHz, 
main bus 66 MHz) by definition scores 1.0.  On floating point
multiplication and division my PPC scores 1.2 .  On floating point
using the exp(), sin(), cos() functions, my PPC however, is 10-15
times slower than the Pentium.  I am told this is because of a rather
poor math library -- I will find out more about this as I update my
system software from the now-venerable System 7.1.2.

The compiler used was CodeWarrior 7.0.  For a comparison between
CodeWarrior 7.0 and the Motorola compiler, which generates faster
code, visit the PowerPC pages on the Motorola site.  

The benchmark results are astonishing : would you have expected 
a 66/33 MHz system to be remotely comparable to a 90/66 MHz system ?

There are several things, IMO, masking the true performance of the
PPC systems.  One is a technological lag.  The fastest PPC system
I'm aware of has a 50 MHz bus, while the Pentiums are at 66 MHz.
PPC systems don't use EDO RAM.  The most common PPC OS - MacOS is
not fully native.  Even in chip technology, the PPCs are at 0.5 micron,
while the Pentiums are moving to 0.35 and 0.25 micron.  

PPC systems are able to give competitive performance to Pentiums
with slower system parts.  The PPC chips are price competitive to 
Pentiums.   Why then haven't PPC systems clobbered Pentium systems
on price ?

The main reason, IMO, is that Intel systems have 10-20 times the 
volume of PPC in sales, and so costs are likewise recovered over
many more systems.  Note that if Apple abandoned backward compatibility
and produced a brand-new OS, the PPC would have a marketshare of
zero.  The lousy math library that I have for my PPC is illustrative
of the difficulty involved in exploiting the new architecture.

The limits on the PPC are economic, and not technological.
As PPCs move up the technological curve, Intel will find itself
running harder and harder to stay competitive with the x86 
architecture.

-arun gupta