Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site caip.RUTGERS.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!ut-sally!topaz!caip!DEC.BANKS
From: DEC.BANKS@MARLBORO.DEC.COM
Newsgroups: net.micro.amiga
Subject: Re: ST vs Amiga, and please quit this silly ranting
Message-ID: <827@caip.RUTGERS.EDU>
Date: Mon, 23-Dec-85 16:45:28 EST
Article-I.D.: caip.827
Posted: Mon Dec 23 16:45:28 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 25-Dec-85 01:47:39 EST
Sender: daemon@caip.RUTGERS.EDU
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 15

From: Dawn Banks <DEC.BANKS@MARLBORO.DEC.COM>

Mr Freed:

   Have your really ignored the half dozen postings to this list explaining
that the poor drystone performace on the Amiga is more due to bad compiler
output?  I think the 1000 ballpark figure (from another compiler) is
about what you'd expect in relation to the ST given the Amiga's slower
clock and no explanation of cycle stealing is needed.

   Plea to the rest of the net:  We've all seen dismal numbers for a drystone
benchmark run with Lattice C for the Amiga.  We've also seen more impressive
numbers from a better compiler.  Could we all please get off this stupid
benchmark war?  
   --------