Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!pcrat!rick
From: rick@pcrat.uucp (Rick Richardson)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386
Subject: Re: Simple X windows benchmark
Message-ID: <1990Jul30.020330.6291@pcrat.uucp>
Date: 30 Jul 90 02:03:30 GMT
References: <1990Jul28.014025.17578@pegasus.com>
Reply-To: rick@pcrat.UUCP (Rick Richardson)
Organization: PC Research, Inc., Tinton Falls, NJ
Lines: 40

In article <1990Jul28.014025.17578@pegasus.com> richard@pegasus.com (Richard Foulk) writes:
>One data point:
>
>	Unix:		ISC 2.0.2 Unix
>	X server:	ISC X11R3 1.0.0, Xhrc
>	Resolution:	720x348x2
>	Video card:	Hercules monochrome graphics clone
>	Cpu:		33MHz 386 (Mylex), 128k cache, 8megs RAM
>	80387:		no
>
>	Time:		1:43

Here's another point, for the slowest 386 we've got:

	Unix:		ISC 2.0.2 Unix
	X server:	ISC X11R3 1.0.0, Xvga
	Resolution:	640x480x16
	Video card:	Paradise EGA-480
	Cpu:		16MHz 386 (Mylex), 64k cache, 4MB 32 bit + 4MB 16 bit
	80387:		no
	80287:		yes

	Time:		1:39

This is rather strange. The elapsed times are so close,
even though there is at least a factor of two difference
in the raw performance of the machines.

I'd guess one or both of the following are true:

	1) The herc server has had zero tuning
	2) The test saturates the bandwidth to the herc card

-Rick

-- 
Rick Richardson | Looking for FAX software for UNIX/386 ??? Ask About: |Mention
PC Research,Inc.| FaxiX - UNIX Facsimile System (tm)                   |FAX# for
uunet!pcrat!rick| FaxJet - HP LJ PCL to FAX (Send WP,Word,Pagemaker...)|Sample
(201) 389-8963  | JetRoff - troff postprocessor for HP LaserJet and FAX|Output