Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!seismo!rochester!cornell!batcomputer!braner
From: braner@batcomputer.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Floating Point Benchmarks
Message-ID: <640@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>
Date: Wed, 8-Apr-87 23:00:10 EST
Article-I.D.: batcompu.640
Posted: Wed Apr  8 23:00:10 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 11-Apr-87 13:48:57 EST
References: <8704080100.AA18384@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Reply-To: braner@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu.UUCP (braner)
Distribution: world
Organization: Theory Center, Cornell University, Ithaca NY
Lines: 17
Summary: Savage benchmark tests transcendental functions _only_

[]

Interpreters can give good results on the Savage benchmark since most
of the time is spent on the tan(), exp(), etc.  To judge the suitability
of a language system for number crunching you need to check integer
and simple-FP-ops performance too!

From what I've gathered by now, if you want to crunch numbers you should get
a FP chip.  On the ST, you should use Absoft Fortran.  (Alcyon and MWC are
not that far behind, though, and Alcyon (like Fortran) allows single-precision
when you need the speed and don't need that much accuracy.  Does MWC?)

I suggest we gather here some benchmarks about the speed of typical +-*/
FP operations (a complete statement of the form: "a=b+c;" - that's the
only way to benchmark!!!).

- Moshe Braner