Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga.marketplace:596 misc.forsale.computers:7117
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!convex!swarren
From: swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.marketplace,misc.forsale.computers
Subject: Re: CMI Processor Accelerator for Amiga2000
Message-ID: <1991Mar19.200219.28660@convex.com>
Date: 19 Mar 91 20:02:19 GMT
Article-I.D.: convex.1991Mar19.200219.28660
References: <1991Mar18.205929.9435@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <1991Mar19.185203.3096@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>
Sender: news@convex.com (news access account)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Convex Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx.
Lines: 33
Nntp-Posting-Host: neptune.convex.com

In article <1991Mar19.185203.3096@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> jdickson@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Jeff Dickson) writes:
##CMI (Creative Microsystems Inc.) Processor Accelerator
## 
##Computing Performance relative to:
## 
##                   A1000  IBM/XT
##         Integer:   1.8     5.9
##  Floating Point:   3.2    24.2
## 
##Contact: blf@churchy.ai.mit.edu
#
#	The Amiga's computing performance cannot be compared to that of the
#IBM PC. The whole time the Amiga is cranking out these numbers, it is sharing
#the CPU amoung several processes, tasks, devices, etc. You could only produce
#accurate results if the Amiga were "dry" (not running anything else).
#
#		-jeff


You missed the point, Jeff.  These are not benchmark results showing
performance results on the 1000 vs a PC/XT.  These are the performance
results of an accelerator, showing how much faster it is than the given
machines.

ie it is 1.8 times faster than a stock 1000, and it is 5.9 times faster
than a PC/XT.  So calm down.  If you will just do the math, this is
indicating that the 1000 is 3 times faster than the XT.

            _.
--Steve   ._||__      DISCLAIMER: All opinions are my own.
  Warren   v\ *|     ----------------------------------------------
             V       {uunet,sun}!convex!swarren; swarren@convex.com
--