Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!winchester!mash
From: mash@mips.COM (John Mashey)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: now 15.8 is almost 27.5???
Message-ID: <37917@mips.mips.COM>
Date: 14 Apr 90 19:59:09 GMT
References: <1990Apr4.010757.918@smsc.sony.com> <18191@rpp386.cactus.org> <1990Apr5.215435.8158@ico.isc.com> <48588@lanl.gov>
Sender: news@mips.COM
Reply-To: mash@mips.COM (John Mashey)
Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Inc.
Lines: 28

In article <48588@lanl.gov> hsv@lanl.gov (Henry S Vaccaro) writes:
...
>I've just finished my own tests on a mostly integer code I use here.
>The mackine above is 9-10 times faster than an IBM RT Model 125.  That
>machine is roughly "3 MIPS", and runs the code 5-7 times faster than our
>old 780 could.  Does this mean that the RS/6000 is 5x9 to 7x10 VUPS?

Could you describe these benchmarks?  And also, give the version of
the VAX11/780?  Including the compilers?  It is very easy to
get different numbers depending on the versions of these things.
If some of the benchmarks are real applications, or close, could any of
them be posted so people could try them out on others?

The reason I ask, is that the SPEC integer codes:
	a) Are all real programs.
	b) Are compared against a current 11/780 with current compilers.
and the 530 gives relative performance ratings of:
	17.8, 20.7, 19.8, 23,  for geometric mean of 20.2.
whereas your calculations would indicate 45-70.  Hence it would help to
publish enough more data for us to figure out why there is a factor
of 2-3.5X difference.  Note, as alwaqys, that Dhrystone is one of the best
possible programs to use to prove how much better than a VAX you are,
for reasons covered many times in this group.
-- 
-john mashey	DISCLAIMER: <generic disclaimer, I speak for me only, etc>
UUCP: 	{ames,decwrl,prls,pyramid}!mips!mash  OR  mash@mips.com
DDD:  	408-991-0253 or 408-720-1700, x253, or 408-524-7015
USPS: 	MIPS Computer Systems, 930 E. Arques, Sunnyvale, CA 94086