Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxq.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!houxm!ihnp4!ihuxq!ken
From: ken@ihuxq.UUCP (ken perlow)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Re: AT&T 3B2 system - (nf)
Message-ID: <1355@ihuxq.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 27-Nov-84 19:35:50 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxq.1355
Posted: Tue Nov 27 19:35:50 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 28-Nov-84 04:40:41 EST
References: <255@ho95b.UUCP>, <32300005@smu.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 29

--
>> ...The same program was
>> run on a MacIntosh.  The result was that the 3B2 took about
>> 1.3 times the time it took the Mac.  Note that this is only
>> a cpu speed test and not really a benchmark.

>> main()
>> {
>> 	register int i, j;

>> 	for (i = 0; i < 1000; i++)
>> 		for (j = 0; j < 1000; j++) ;
>> }

>> Perry

Beware the spurious benchmark, my son!  When you run null loops,
what you're testing is the hardware implementation of loop-related
instructions.  To know whether you've really tested cpu speed
you'll have to look at the assembly code generated by each compiler
to see what is actually running on each machine.  Efficient looping
instructions are a good thing, of course, so the test is not worthless.
-- 
                    *** ***
JE MAINTIENDRAI   ***** *****
                 ****** ******  27 Nov 84 [7 Frimaire An CXCIII]
ken perlow       *****   *****
(312)979-7188     ** ** ** **
..ihnp4!iwsl8!ken   *** ***