Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!think!mit-eddie!ll-xn!cit-vax!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!decvax!decwrl!sun!plx!ed
From: ed@plx.UUCP (Ed Chaban)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.m68k,comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: 80386 Benchmark Data
Message-ID: <325@plx.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 19-Nov-86 16:21:51 EST
Article-I.D.: plx.325
Posted: Wed Nov 19 16:21:51 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 20-Nov-86 22:35:30 EST
References: <324@plx.UUCP> <64@cogent.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Plexus Computers; San Jose, CA
Lines: 33
Xref: mnetor comp.sys.m68k:25 comp.sys.intel:35

In article  <64@cogent.UUCP>  Mark Steven Jeghers writes:

> In article <324@plx.UUCP> ed@plx.UUCP (Ed Chaban) writes:
> >There has been much screaming about which chip is faster 80386 or
> >68020.  Recently, I received benchmark data from Neal Nelson & Associates.
> >This benchmark showed results from a Compaq 386. I compared this data to
> >the results from a Tower32
> >
> >The 386 was SIGNIFICANTLY *SLOWER* than the '020 in LONG INTEGER MATH
> >while it was virtually *EQUAL* to the '020 in SHORT INTEGER MATH.
> >Don't say it was the memory because the "String Copy and Compare"
> >test was identical too.
> >
> 
> Is disinformation a possibility here?  You know, get the rumor out
> before anyone knows for sure which is faster, thus grabbing a little
> head start in the race?  Yes?  No?

Only if you think Neal Nelson has an axe to grind. So far as I can tell,
Nelson is very objective in his benchmarking.  If you are accusing *ME*
Mark, I'd have to be INSANE to misquote published data.

As for "Head Start" it is obvious that Motorola *ALWAYS* had it.
I personally don't give a sh*t if Intel's chip is faster or slower,
all I wanna know is what is the reason for the long/short integer
differances.

-ed-

Ed Chaban
Plexus Computers Inc.
Phone: (408) 943-2226
Net: sun!plx!ed