Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site amdcad.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!lsuc!pesnta!amd!amdcad!phil
From: phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: net.arch,net.lang.c,net.micro,net.micro.pc,net.micro.68k
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Need 286 "C" benchmark
Message-ID: <1471@amdcad.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 30-May-85 20:47:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: amdcad.1471
Posted: Thu May 30 20:47:17 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 31-May-85 06:40:42 EDT
References: <426@oakhill.UUCP> <8745@microsoft.UUCP> <583@intelca.UUCP> <433@oakhill.UUCP> <588@intelca.UUCP> <635@cadovax.UUCP>
Reply-To: phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai)
Organization: AMD, Sunnyvale, California
Lines: 15
Xref: utcs net.arch:1257 net.lang.c:5227 net.micro:10244 net.micro.pc:4040 net.micro.68k:829

In article <635@cadovax.UUCP> keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) writes:
>we can write benchmarks that use 12 registers to make the Motorola look
>good, and ones that use 2 to make the Intel look good.)

Does this mean that if you have 16 registers and you only use 2 of them
you pay a penalty for having 14 idle registers? This is about the only
conclusion I can draw from your statement. How good is the 68K overall
if it wins in benchmarks which use lots of registers and loses in benchmarks
which don't use lots of registers?
-- 
 There's always tomorrow.

 Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720
 UUCP: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amdcad!phil
 ARPA: amdcad!phil@decwrl.ARPA