Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 11/03/84 (WLS Mods); site astrovax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!astrovax!richmon From: richmon@astrovax.UUCP (Michael Richmond) Newsgroups: net.micro.att Subject: compiler speed on the 7300 Message-ID: <597@astrovax.UUCP> Date: Sat, 18-May-85 11:17:50 EDT Article-I.D.: astrovax.597 Posted: Sat May 18 11:17:50 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 19-May-85 00:33:57 EDT Distribution: net Organization: Princeton Univ. Astrophysics Lines: 31 I went to play with the 7300 at my local computer store yesterday and have some (dis?)heartening news for people like me who want to do a lot of program development on the machine. The compile times for a simple program consisting of nothing but lines like printf("hello there\n"); is (for 7300 in window environment, 7300 out of window environment and VAX 11/750 (out of window environment :-) )) 7300 w/ windows 7300 VAX 65 statements :28 :09 250 statements 1:58 :55 :21 The number that really gets me down is the figure for 7300 performance with windows (the 'user agent') running. It seemed that there was a lot of disk activity in the window environment even when I was doing nothing - I'm not sure what the CPU was doing, but it ate up cycles like crazy. Perhaps nice-ing up large compiles would help, but by how much? Has anyone else done tests to compare with this rather simple-minded one? I was expecting somewhat faster times from the 7300, especially in the window environment where I'll be doing most of my work (oh, yes, I decided to get one anyway), but perhaps I was being unrealistic. I'd be willing to bet that a comparison of execution times for would put the 7300 in a better light, but for development that isn't nearly as important. Ah well. -- Michael Richmond Princeton University, Astrophysics {allegra,akgua,burl,cbosgd,decvax,ihnp4,noao,princeton,vax135}!astrovax!richmon