Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!olivea!oliveb!amdahl!dougd
From: dougd@uts.amdahl.com (Douglas DeMers)
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
Subject: Re: Price/Performance figures for Number-Crunching
Summary: No fortran compiler?  Use f2c for fortran benchmarks.
Message-ID: <12YH01OJ51e=00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>
Date: 3 Apr 91 18:53:27 GMT
References: <1991Mar23.192405.7668@aeras.uucp> <1628@spim.mips.COM> <17933@sdcc6.ucsd.edu> <1789@spim.mips.COM>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 24

mash@mips.com (John Mashey) writes:
>Let's take the 3 problems in order:
>	a) Single-task integer compute speed.  For the case you describe,
>	it is probably not too bad to convert 3 of the 4 C programs,
>	and put that profile versus other things.  (I wouldn't attempt
>	teh 001.gcc benchmark).  Thus, you would at least get a couple
>	data points that you could compare on, and most of these will
>	run OK in an 8MB machine.
>	b) FP: is FP important to you?
>		No.  Done with this part.
>		Yes. painful, with no FORTRAN compiler.
>			also, we didn't manage to find a C floating-point
>			program we liked the first round, so there's nothing
>			there for you.

Have you tried f2c, the fortran to c program translator?  I used it once
on linpack (another "classic" fortran benchmark) to get a c version.
Even with a fortran compiler available, it is sometimes entertaining to
compare a translated-to-c benchmark against the fortran compiler.
-- 
Douglas DeMers,      | (408-746-8546) | dougd@uts.amdahl.com
Amdahl Corporation   |                | {sun,uunet}!amdahl!dougd
  [The opinions expressed above are mine, solely, and do not    ]
  [necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of Amdahl Corp. ]