Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!motcsd!hpda!hpcuhc!edwardm
From: edwardm@hpcuhc.HP.COM (Edward McClanahan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Floating point
Message-ID: <680008@hpcuhc.HP.COM>
Date: 12 Jun 89 18:52:12 GMT
References: <89157.122728UH2@PSUVM>
Organization: Hewlett Packard, Cupertino
Lines: 16

> I have compared a MacII, a NeXT, a Sun 4/280, and a DecStation3100
> running the CD3040 opamp in Berkeley spice3b1. (I don't have the
> graphics part running on the NeXT but that didn't matter for this
> benchmark.)

> Here's the results:
> MacII: 59 sec., NeXT: 21 sec., Sun 4/280: 8.7 sec., DecStation 3100:4.0sec.

Did this application take advantage of the Motorola 56001 DSP chip
in the NeXT?  Is it reasonable for users to expect applications developed
for multiple machines (MacII,NeXT,Sun4,DecStation3100,Sun3,etc...) to
take advantage of such "product differentiators" as this?  And, if we
are only comparing the CPU(and memory systems, e.g. cache, main, secondary),
why was the NeXT (at 25MHz) so much faster than the MacII (at 15.67MHz)?

Ed "enquiring minds want to know" McClanahan