Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site othervax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!linus!philabs!micomvax!othervax!ray
From: ray@othervax.UUCP (Raymond D. Dunn)
Newsgroups: net.micro,net.micro.pc
Subject: Re: NEC V20 -- seems to work
Message-ID: <749@othervax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 13-Jan-86 11:48:26 EST
Article-I.D.: othervax.749
Posted: Mon Jan 13 11:48:26 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 15-Jan-86 08:14:07 EST
References: <756@spar.UUCP> <1133@cp1.UUCP>
Reply-To: ray@othervax.UUCP (Raymond D. Dunn)
Organization: Philips Information Systems - St. Laurent  P.Q., Canada
Lines: 19
Xref: watmath net.micro:13487 net.micro.pc:6524
Summary: 

In article <1133@cp1.UUCP> hart@cp1.UUCP (Rod Hart) writes:

>..[using NEC v30].. Norton's sysinfo
>my at&t 6300 jumped from a 1.9 to a 3.9 in-
>dex. Kind of hard to beleive, but it is TRUE!

Please note, and tell all your friends, that Norton's SI test results
show NO relationship to the actual overall machine performance.  The
SI command is a simple timing test loop which contains and is heavily
weighted by, a multiply instruction.  Thus the 'good' result with
the V20, and little effect on the result from memory wait states etc.

Lets try and kill this one stone dead before manufacturers start
designing their machines to produce 'better' SI results!

Norton where are you?  Can you do us all a service and publish a
realistic system performance test??

Ray Dunn.  ..philabs!micomvax!othervax!ray