Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!bagate!cbmvax!jesup
From: jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: Slow GVP '030 accelerator board
Message-ID: <16003@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 21 Nov 90 09:22:41 GMT
References: <5765@crash.cts.com>
Reply-To: jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 17

In article <5765@crash.cts.com> lkoop@pnet01.cts.com (Lamonte Koop) writes:
>accesses are quite time consuming.  However, the figure of '20%' over a stock
>2000 with a standard 68000 I cannot agree on as being correct in any sense.
>To illustrate, I turned off the 32-bit RAM (well...didn't configure it, so for
>all intensive puposes it's off) on my 25MHz 030 based system here.  My
>performance figures show the system at 2.1x (or 210%) of a normal 68000-based
>Amiga....equivalently a 110% increase, not 20%. [This is with the Data cache

	Remember that most performance testers tend to be small loops of
code, which are handled very nicely by a 256-byte I-cache.  This causes them
to overstate the application-level performance of a system.

-- 
Randell Jesup, Keeper of AmigaDos, Commodore Engineering.
{uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!jesup, jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com  BIX: rjesup  
Thus spake the Master Ninjei: "If your application does not run correctly,
do not blame the operating system."  (From "The Zen of Programming")  ;-)