Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!brl-adm!adm!G.MDP@score.stanford.edu
From: G.MDP@score.stanford.edu (Mike Peeler)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.misc
Subject: Re: Siev and 2^4096 Benchmarks Updated
Message-ID: <1172@brl-adm.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 28-Nov-86 20:02:22 EST
Article-I.D.: brl-adm.1172
Posted: Fri Nov 28 20:02:22 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 28-Nov-86 21:52:33 EST
Sender: news@brl-adm.ARPA
Lines: 15

It's worth noting that optimizing doesn't improve the benchmark.
What I'm interested in is how fast TYPICAL CODE runs.  Typical
code isn't optimal.  Typical C code doesn't put all variables in
registers.  I don't always have source and I don't have the time
to hand-optimize every program I run.

What I want from a benchmark is a basis for a price-performance
decision.  If an automatic optimizer is available and typical
code can take advantage of it, it's ok if the benchmark uses it.
But if typical C programs have sub-optimal data declarations, I
want to make my comparison on that basis.

Thanks,
   Mike Peeler <G.MDP@Score.Stanford.EDU>
-------