Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!agate!stanford.edu!leland.Stanford.EDU!elaine18.Stanford.EDU!dhinds
From: dhinds@elaine18.Stanford.EDU (David Hinds)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: small benchmark
Message-ID: <1991May23.161800.17528@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 23 May 91 16:18:00 GMT
Sender: news@leland.Stanford.EDU (Mr News)
Organization: Stanford University - AIR
Lines: 22

So, now that I've seen a lot of the "Bobstone" results, I have a comp.arch
question: why should my SGI Iris 4D-240 do so poorly?  This is a 4-processor
shared-memory 25MHz MIPS R3000 system.  My results were:

cb-iris> time bench
Total time (sys+user)       :   10.18  (bobstones)
Page faults (min/maj)       :   0/0
Blocks in input/output      :   0/0
Context switches (vol/invol):   0/0
9.900u 0.290s 0:10.20 99.9% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w

This is on an unloaded system, 32 MB main memory, 64K instruction cache,
64K data cache.  I can't remember now if there is a secondary cache as
well.  When I use the "pixie" execution profiler, I find that only 1.7 sec
of user time are accounted for in the profile.  "pixie" says it assumes a
perfect memory model.  Does that mean that like 85% of the run time is
occupied by cache misses ?!?  This seems extraordinarily high.  How large
are the caches on the other MIPS systems tested - I've seen much faster
times posted here.

 -David Hinds
  dhinds@cb-iris.stanford.edu