Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!mtune!codas!usfvax2!pdn!alan From: alan@pdn.UUCP (Alan Lovejoy) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: More on Byte Benchmarks Message-ID: <1063@pdn.UUCP> Date: Wed, 19-Aug-87 10:06:27 EDT Article-I.D.: pdn.1063 Posted: Wed Aug 19 10:06:27 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 22-Aug-87 06:12:13 EDT References: <170@lakesys.UUCP> Reply-To: alan@pdn.UUCP (0000-Alan Lovejoy) Organization: Paradyne Corporation, Largo, Florida Lines: 17 In article <170@lakesys.UUCP> steven@.UUCP (Steven Goodman) writes: >The 68881 was trimmed down to about 8Mhz in order to have it a valid >comparison seeing as the 80287 ran at 8Mhz. But even then it was unfair >to the Compaq seeing as they were using the "old" model which used this >older FPU. Also Mac had cacheing where new Deskpro's has integrated. Just a minute here. Is this a benchmark of CPU chips or computer systems? On the surface, BYTE made it appear that they were benchmarking CPU chips, but the text of the article made it clear they were benchmarking specific computer systems. If they're benchmarking systems, then they should have left the chip speeds alone, and "fair" can only be defined as comparing shipped product to shipped product. If they really were benchmarking CPU chips, then the whole think is so drastically unfair to everyone that it's beyond fixing. Alan "you can't argue from both sides of an issue at the same time" Lovejoy