Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!wb3ffv!ka3ovk!raysnec!shwake From: shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386 Subject: Re: Is this a reasonable platform for SCO Unix? Keywords: benchmarking Message-ID: <309@raysnec.UUCP> Date: 28 Apr 91 17:14:31 GMT References: <638@mixcom.COM> <1991Apr25.143342.18221@news.cs.indiana.edu> Distribution: comp.unix.sysv386 Organization: IRS/CI - Technical Solutions Branch Lines: 18 mikes@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Michael Squires) writes: >A 486/25 under SCO ODT 1.0 clocked at 21K 1.1 Dhrystones/sec; the same code >compiled on a SPARCStation-1 clocked at the same, 21K/sec. A very short >loop running under the elk 1.3 SCHEME interpreter showed nearly identical >wall clock times running on a SPARCStation 1+ and the same 486/25 (if anyone >wants to play with SCHEME elk 1.3 has 386 UNIX support and compiles without >signficant changes using Microsoft C). Great. You've shown that a 486/25 can run Dhrystones and short loops under elk as well as a SparcStation 1+. Is *that* what you do all day? Has it occurred to you that these tests, and others of their ilk, provide only the crudest indication of relative performance? Well, consider it. How tragic that, as hardware, operating environments and applications have become more sophisticated, people still give credence to such quick-and-dirty measurements. ----------- uunet!media!ka3ovk!raysnec!shwake shwake@rsxtech