Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!hplabs!nsc!roger From: roger@nsc.nsc.com (Roger Thompson) Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.sys.nsc.32k Subject: Re: the NS32532 Message-ID: <4201@nsc.nsc.com> Date: Mon, 13-Apr-87 10:07:11 EST Article-I.D.: nsc.4201 Posted: Mon Apr 13 10:07:11 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 19-Apr-87 03:37:20 EST References: <4190@nsc.nsc.com> <278@winchester.mips.UUCP> Organization: National Semiconductor, Sunnyvale Lines: 32 Xref: mnetor comp.arch:964 comp.sys.nsc.32k:80 In article <278@winchester.mips.UUCP>, mash@mips.UUCP (John Mashey) writes: > 3) When publishing performance figures of microprocessors, if there is > to be ANY semblance of credibility, you MUST specify the memory system > hooked to the micro as modeled in the simulations, and give other environmental > issues. Here is a starting list: > cache size(s) > data cache nature: write-thru [maybe with write buffers], > or write-back > cache line sizes > number of cycles penalty for refilling the caches, refill nature > main memory DRAM speed used in the model to achieve the above. > environment: standalone, or in simulated virtual memory environment, > including MMU overhead, if any, and something for OS overhead > [like clock ticks that execute code that trashes the caches > now and then]. > [A bunch of this is very relevant to what real performance one will see > the list some real machine numbers, that following the usual Dhrystone I may get corrected on this shortly. I believe that the simulations were done with the assumptions that external memory was all 0 wait state. However, in support of this let me say that we have a parallel design effort on a vme board pair that supports a 64K direct mapped cache, write through with a write buffer. The cache is organized as 4096 lines of 16 bytes. The board also has 4 Meg of on-board ram. In this configuration, our simulations show that the board with the 532 will be able to sustain a performance of approximately 95% of the full rated performance of the 532. Not bad, and one doesn't need to pay mega bucks for the RAM. Roger Thompson