Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!haven!uvaarpa!hudson!astsun.astro.Virginia.EDU!gl8f
From: gl8f@astsun.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Accelerator Benchmarks
Keywords: CMI, accelerators, benchmarks
Message-ID: <1732@hudson.acc.virginia.edu>
Date: 12 Jul 89 19:27:33 GMT
References: <12662@well.UUCP>
Sender: news@hudson.acc.virginia.edu
Reply-To: gl8f@astsun.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Lines: 18

In article <12662@well.UUCP> stevef@well.UUCP (Steven Robert Fordyce) writes:
> Since there has been so much interest lately in the barrage of accelerator
> choices that have suddenly come to the ST market, we thought that a
> comparison of them all, side by side, was in order.

If you run Minix, your mileage will vary... In particular, the CMI board
has its "Fast ROM" feature, which won't help Minix, while the FAST-T16
board's cache should help Minix same as before, as long as you don't use
self-modifying code (presumably).

It's nice to see benchmarks; the only thing I could have wished for was
(1) a benchmark of a REAL program with loops that does a fair amount
of computing in registers with low cycle-count instructions (not shifts
or floating point), and (2) less marketing hype...

------
Greg Lindahl
gl8f@virginia.edu                                             I'm not the NRA.