Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uunet!bu.edu!wang!lee From: lee@wang.com (Lee Story) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: Mathematica Benchmarks (NeXT vs. DEC and Mac) Message-ID: Date: 7 Jan 91 23:33:12 GMT References: <1991Jan3.214940.1@linus.claremont.edu> Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA, USA Lines: 49 jack@linus.claremont.edu writes: >Hi, >I just ran some interesting Mathematica benchmarks on a NeXTstation, a >Mac IIci (with Math coprocessor), and a DECStation model 3100. The >results are a little surprising. The Mathematica benchmarks are a ... >The Mathematica benchmark is by no means perfect. It does not (nor is >intended to) replace LINPACK, SPEC, Mips or any other widely used >benchmark. There is a fair deal of variation of the results depending >on the specific test. But I do like the test because it is fairly >quick and portable (assuming the demo system has Mathematica). I also >like the fact that it is a benchmark that uses a "real life" >application. System vs. System performance tends to vary with the >application. I also like the fact that, as far as I know, no >manufacturer has written a compiler to optimize this benchmark. >Comments? I can't resist a response here. Is this part of the continuing attempt to post the most worthless pseudo-benchmark proposals?? (ref. the extended discussion of 'bc' as a benchmark) I've used Mathematica frequently since the first version, in its Mac, PC (dos), and NeXt manifestations, and like many others have bemoaned the poor performance on the Macintosh. How the Wolfram folks (esp. Mr. Gray) could make the Mac the target machine for such a lovely front-end, while crippling the performance of the engine, not allowing for use of the kernel on the Mac from another (Mac's) front-end, not using Multifinder to implement RunThrough[], etc. etc., I just can't understand. Change flames here. As a benchmark, Mathematica is wholly bogus. It has been reorganized (somewhat ineptly, it appears) to run with the Mac's segmented code resource scheme, with PharLap on dos, etc. The compilers used are unstated in its documentation, and the source is not available for recompilation. Thus it cannot be used to benchmark raw processor/memory speed or processor/memory/compiler speed. What's left? Lee -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Had the man looked through another peephole he might have said, ...." Lee Story (lee@wang.com) Wang Laboratories, Inc. ------------------------------------------------------------------------