Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!ucsd!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!crash!pnet01!uzun
From: uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzun)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: MIP rating for the Mac II
Message-ID: <1169@crash.cts.com>
Date: 14 Jan 90 01:16:02 GMT
Sender: root@crash.cts.com
Organization: People-Net [pnet01], El Cajon CA
Lines: 27

>> Is the Mac II as fast as a 20 Mhz 386
This is great, the guy asks a simple question and 10k of
absolute noise is generated no one answering him!
Now it is true no 1 benchmark can indicate much, but in
my experience the Mac II and Mac IIx both perform slightly
better than an 80386 clone running a dos extender (20Mhz)
The 80387 at 20mhz is somewhat faster than the 68882
running at 15+ Mhz, in my experience, except for some
transcendental functions.

Some Benchmarks:
sieve (100 iterations) - 5 secs (386 20 Mhz) 4 secs (mac II and IIx)
qsort (byte benchmark) - 18 secs (386 20 Mhz) 9 secs (mac II) 6 secs (mac iix)

using Turbo C 2.0 for the 386 and MPW C for the Mac (using -mc68020 option)

I do not have fp figures handy but the 387 was faster than the 68882 on the
mac iix in most cases.  They were fairly comparable though.  In day to day
use, mac applications on a Mac II or IIx tend to perform slightly faster
than the MS-DOS applications running on 386's.  If the MS-DOS application
is text only, sometimes it feels faster.

-Roger

UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd ucsd nosc}!crash!pnet01!uzun
ARPA: crash!pnet01!uzun@nosc.mil
INET: uzun@pnet01.cts.com