Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!sun-barr!apple!usc!ucsd!ucbvax!mtxinu!unisoft!hoptoad!fidogate!f555.n161.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Sonny.Shrivastava
From: Sonny.Shrivastava@f555.n161.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Sonny Shrivastava)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Surely A Iifx Blo
Message-ID: <7878.271B9F30@fidogate.FIDONET.ORG>
Date: 13 Oct 90 11:13:14 GMT
Sender: ufgate@fidogate.FIDONET.ORG (newsout1.26)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:161/555 - MacCircles, Pleasanton CA
Lines: 56


        >KWhets/sec: 882.4 (using FPU) 39.4 (not using FPU)
        >Dhrys/sec:  2871 FPU, 2717 not
        >Sieve:      3.70 sec FPU, 3.83 sec
        >Savage err:  7.988e-10, 2.297e-11
        >Savage time: 8.52 sec FPU, 71.43 sec
        >Savage iterations: 25000 FPU, 5000
        >
        >CPU test: 6.40 (no FPU)
        >Math:     95.27 FPU, 5.24
        >Performance:  5.42 (no FPU)
 
        I'd be curious to see how various Macs performed.
        
Here are my results on a Mac IIci, System 6.0.5, Speedometer 2.5 (disregard 
results in previous message):
        
        KWhetstones/sec.:  882.353
        Dhrystones/sec.:   5791.506
        Sieve (Secs, 100 times):  3.750
        Savage Cum. Error: 7.98815e-010
        Savage Time:       7.317 sec.
        Savage Iterations: 25000
        
        CPU Test:  6.71
        Math:      149.71
        Disk:      3.15
        Performance:  7.45 (no FPU)
        
As you can see, the Mac IIci easily, without doubt, blows the doors off the 
Amiga 3000 with Amax-II.  Just compare the Dhrystones/sec. figure.  In almost 
every test, the Mac IIci comes out on top, especiall in the CPU, FPU, and 
Performance tests, which are the only real-world figures.  I think you should 
give your friend a printout of this message, and let him see the figures for 
himself.  It's easy to blow off a lot of steam about the Amiga when you don't 
have the facts.  Well, here they are!
        
By the way, the numbers in the CPU, Math, Disk, and Performance tests for 
both the Amiga/Amax-II and the Mac IIci indicate how many times faster they 
are than a stock Mac SE with a 20 MB hard disk.  Therefore, the 
Amiga-3000/Amax-II combination is 5.42 times as powerful as a stock SE, while 
the Mac IIci is 7.45 times as powerful as a stock SE.  These times are not 
relative to the Mac II, as you indicated in your message, but to the Mac SE.
        
So, if anybody ever tries to tell you their A-3000/Amax-II combination blows 
the doors off a Mac IIci or higher, you tell them to buzz off and get a life. 
 You can expect the IIfx to have at least twice the performance of a IIci.
        
Hope this helped!  I hunted on a lot of BBSs for Speedometer 2.5, and 
finally found one after calling about 10 Mac BBSs.  If it wasn't for you, I 
never would have updated my Speedometer!  Thanks.

--  
Sonny Shrivastava - via FidoNet node 1:125/777
    UUCP: ...!uunet!hoptoad!fidogate!161!555!Sonny.Shrivastava
INTERNET: Sonny.Shrivastava@f555.n161.z1.FIDONET.ORG