Article View: net.arch
Article #3023re:Floating point performance
From: aglew
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1986 14:59
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1986 14:59
21 lines
1613 bytes
1613 bytes
>> The final column gives some feel for how effective these >> processor/co-processor (just processor for the T414) >> combinations are at turning MFLOPS into usable floating >> point performance. > >As one who has looked at the relative merits of various processors >and coprocessors before making a selection, I am not at all concerned >about "how effective [a] processor/co-processor combination[] [is] at >turning MFLOPS into usable floating point performance." The bottom >line for an application is closely tied to the numbers in the "kWhets" >column. The real question is, "How fast will it run my application?" > > Steve Rice Well, not only that, but perhaps also "How much will it cost to run my application?" Users don't care how effective an architecture is, they only care what the final result is. People interested in design, however, may be interested in the ratios, since a low performance product with good figures of merit may show an approach that should be turned into a high performance product.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<5100150@ccvaxa>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!rutgers!caip!clyde!cuae2!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uiucuxc!ccvaxa!aglewReferences:
<3833@nsc.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!columbia!rutgers!caip!clyde!cuae2!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uiucuxc!ccvaxa!aglew From: aglew@ccvaxa.UUCP Newsgroups: net.arch Subject: re:Floating point performance Message-ID: <5100150@ccvaxa> Date: Wed, 15-Oct-86 10:59:00 EDT Article-I.D.: ccvaxa.5100150 Posted: Wed Oct 15 10:59:00 1986 Date-Received: Fri, 17-Oct-86 03:47:39 EDT References: <3833@nsc.UUCP> Lines: 21 Nf-ID: #R:nsc.UUCP:3833:ccvaxa:5100150:000:1025 Nf-From: ccvaxa.UUCP!aglew Oct 15 09:59:00 1986