Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!ames!ptsfa!ihnp4!alberta!edm!steve
From: steve@edm.UUCP (Stephen Samuel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.m68k,comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: 386 vs 020 and big benchmarks (sieve)
Message-ID: <143@edm.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 23-Apr-87 04:52:22 EST
Article-I.D.: edm.143
Posted: Thu Apr 23 04:52:22 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 25-Apr-87 19:21:56 EST
References: <930@intsc.UUCP> <513@omen.UUCP> <933@intsc.UUCP> <523@omen.UUCP>
Distribution: comp
Organization: Unexsys Systems Inc., Edmonton,AB.
Lines: 22
Summary: Yes, there are 'hot spots'. That's exactly the point!
Xref: mnetor comp.sys.m68k:403 comp.sys.intel:194

In article <523@omen.UUCP>, caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX) writes:
> In article <933@intsc.UUCP> tomk@intsc.UUCP (Tom Kohrs @fae) writes:
> > :Show me a benchmark that does not fit in 256 bytes thats even keeps up
>                                             ^^^^^^^^^  (note for ref.)
  . . . .
> The Gentleman from Intel claims siev has a "hot spot" that fits within the
> 256 byte 68020 cache.  ....

That's exactly the point!!! Why do you think Motorola put the d'#n thing IN?
LOTS of program have 'hot spots' (remember the 90/10 rule?????!) and an
instruction cache is designed to take advantage of this fact. If you have
to look so hard for programs that DON'T have such hot-spots, then obviously
Motorola was on the right track when they put in a cache. 
Don't send US on a wild goose chase to fine a benchmark that gives the '386
a snowball's chance -- It's YOUR crusade -- YOU find the goose.

 "We get enough 'snow' related tasks up here in Canada, as it is. I intend to
 enjoy the summer now that it's here."
-- 
-------------
 Stephen Samuel 
  {ihnp4,ubc-vision,seismo!mnetor,vax135}!alberta!edm!steve