Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!bionet!agate!e260-1e.berkeley.edu!c60b-1eq
From: c60b-1eq@e260-1e.berkeley.edu (Noam Mendelson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: Quoting PC Magazine and much more(was Re: Comparing 486 to 386 Systems)
Message-ID: <1991Apr11.111726.22712@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: 11 Apr 91 11:17:26 GMT
References: <1991Apr9.213259.17287@leland.Stanford.EDU> <1991Apr10.000401.26196@agate.berkeley.edu> <3675@sixhub.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 20

In article <3675@sixhub.UUCP> davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:
>In article <1991Apr10.000401.26196@agate.berkeley.edu> c60b-1eq@e260-3e.berkeley.edu (Noam Mendelson) writes:
>
>| I agree with you that PC Magazine can err every once in a while.  But I am
>| familiar with that article and according to the article, the benchmark results
>| were the average of previous machines reviewed by PC Magazine, discounting
>| the very slow and very fast machines.
>  And nebulous things like "bang for the buck" are cost performance
>figures rather than performance alone. The MIPS/$ figure depends on what
>benchmark you use, but they all run faster on the 486, given identical
>support and peripherals.

MIPS/$ figures of three months ago definitely do not apply today.  However,
the performance (note: no dollar signs attached) remains the same among
identical CPU's.

+==========================================================================+
| Noam Mendelson   ..!agate!ucbvax!web!c60b-1eq | "I haven't lost my mind, |
| c60b-1eq@web.Berkeley.EDU                     |  it's backed up on tape  |
| University of California at Berkeley          |  somewhere."             |