Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cbmvax!martin
From: martin@cbmvax.commodore.com (Martin Hunt)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Benchmark:A3000 w/ AMAXII
Message-ID: <15070@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 11 Oct 90 13:51:52 GMT
References: <1990Oct9.184447.4539@ee.rochester.edu> <15009@cbmvax.commodore.com> <28676@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Reply-To: martin@cbmvax.commodore.com (Martin Hunt)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 34

In article <28676@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU writes:
>
>
>In article <15009@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes:
>>In article <1990Oct9.184447.4539@ee.rochester.edu> tombs@ee.rochester.edu writes:
>>>	A3000/25/50		MacIIci		MacIIcx			MAC+
>>>Dhrys/sec 2871(2717)			3736(3816)	(768.8)
> 
>>The Dhrystone test doesn't use any floating point.  But the results do say
>>a few things.  First, that AMAX seems to be taking on a bit more overhead
>>than I would have expected.
>
>Hmmm...  Sure that this test was running in FAST and not CHIP memory?  That
>might just account for a few differences. You'll need something to soak
>up 1 to 2 megs BEFORE you try running the Dhrystone benchmark...

Fast RAM is used BEFORE Chip RAM, so the problem is most likely that
something is using up all the Fast RAM.  In the case of a stock 2M
3000, that something is the 2.0 OS.  Because ROMs are not out yet, the
ROM image is loaded off disk, using up 512K of your 1M fast RAM.  With
other OS processes using up fast RAM, you are lucky if you have a useful
amount when you are finished booting. This is a very common cause of
slow benchmarks on 3000s.

> 
>
>David Navas                                   navas@sim.berkeley.edu
>"Excuse my ignorance, but I've been run over by my train of thought."  -me


Martin

Martin Hunt                     martin@cbmvax.commodore.com
Network Engineer                connectivity <==> power
Commodore-Amiga                 {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!martin