Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!sunc.osc.edu!malgudi!caen!math.lsa.umich.edu!math.lsa.umich.edu!emv From: emv@math.lsa.umich.edu (Edward Vielmetti) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: 80486 v Sparc Message-ID: Date: 19 Oct 90 22:56:44 GMT References: <1990Oct18.040051.3483@frey.nu.oz.au> <527@inews.intel.com> Sender: usenet@math.lsa.umich.edu Distribution: comp Organization: University of Michigan Math Dept., Ann Arbor MI. Lines: 24 In-Reply-To: jsweedle@einstein.intel.com's message of 19 Oct 90 22:31:50 GMT In article <527@inews.intel.com> jsweedle@einstein.intel.com (Jonathan Sweedler) writes: In the February 1990 issue of IEEE Micro there is a comparison between a 25 MHz i486 system (Compaq Deskpro 486/25, Model 650) and a Sun Sparcstation 330 (also running at 25MHz). The Sparcstation 330 is perhaps the rottenest price-performance that I can think of for Sparc models. You pay a huge premium for that big VME cabinet, and it isn't even that big. A better price comparison would be with a Sparcstation 1 (then) or 1+ or IPC. The integer spec mark (does not include the 6 floating-point SPEC programs) for the i486 system is 13.0 and the sparc system is 12.2. When you quote specmarks, please quote as much as you can (all 10 numbers would be the best). Otherwise you put yourself up to the question "why didn't he quote the floating point numbers"? obdisclaimer: I am typing into a sun right now. --Ed Edward Vielmetti, U of Michigan math dept moderator, comp.archives