Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!fluke!ssc-vax!coy
From: coy@ssc-vax.UUCP (Stephen B Coy)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Lattice C questions.
Message-ID: <3448@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Date: 19 Jul 90 18:43:43 GMT
References: <1083@orange9.qtp.ufl.edu> <13270@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Distribution: na
Organization: Boeing Aerospace & Electronics, Seattle WA
Lines: 20

In article <13270@cbmvax.commodore.com>, martin@cbmvax.commodore.com (Martin Hunt) writes:
> >* 5 Packard-Bell 386SX w/out /387	 127.39		 0.69
> >*   16 MHz floating point emulation
> Amiga 500                                146              .79
> 
> It is rather interesting that an Amiga 500 runs this benchmark faster
> than a 386SX.  

Since the benchmark is heavily floating point oriented I'd think
that the results would depend on the floating point library used.
Was the Amiga benchmark compiled for IEEE or FFP?  Microsoft C also
offers an alternate floating point library which gives better speed
at the cost of accuaracy.  Without this information the benchmarks
are just noise.

> Martin Hunt                     martin@cbmvax.commodore.com
> Commodore-Amiga Engineering     {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!martin

Stephen Coy
uw-beaver!ssc-vax!coy