🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <danpop.807194147@rscernix>,
Dan.Pop@mail.cern.ch (Dan Pop) wrote:

>In <30JUL199521455614@vms1.tamu.edu>
>dfa3147@vms1.tamu.edu (ALEXANDER, DYLAN FLYNN) writes:
>
>>P5 performance, too. With the notable (and important, I grant you)
>>exception of Microsoft products, the vast majority of apps run
>>faster on 601s compared to same clock pentiums. 
>
>The question is: where do I find a 133MHz 601?

So what if you can't, not many people have 133MHz Pentiums, and if you
have to make the comparison at 133 MZ you can do it with a PPC604.

>For the same clock comparisons, here you are:
>
>System           CPU      ClkMHz Cache     SPECint SPECfp  Info  Source
>Name             Type     ext/in Ext+I/D   92      92      Date  Obtained
>==============   ======== ====== ========= ======= ======= ===== ==========
>SNI/Pyr PC/E5S   Pentium  33/66  256+8/8   67.4    61.5    Sep93 SPEC newsl
>Compaq DeskproXL Pentium  33/66  256+8/8   65.1    63.6    Sep93 SPEC newsl
>IBM 250          MPC601   66     32        62.6    72.2    Jul94 www.ibm
>
>I avoided the Intel Xpress numbers and stuck to Siemens Nixdorf and Compaq,
>for obvious reasons.
>
>The SPEC apps don't seem to run faster on the 601/66 than on the P5/66.
>Oh, sorry, I forgot that SPEC data are pure bullshit (because they show the
>Pentiums faster than "everbody" knows they actually are :-)

I am really surprised that the 601 did that well without any L2 cache!

-Anders
--
 Anders Sundin, Org. Chem. 2, Lund University, Box 124, S-22100 Lund, Sweden
 e-mail: Anders.Sundin@orgk2.lth.se  voice: +46 462224185 fax: +46 462228209