Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!ukma!gatech!mcnc!thorin!wasp!davis
From: davis@wasp.cs.unc.edu (Mark Davis)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: sun's new mips honesty (16.67/14 = 8.4/x, solve for x)
Message-ID: <1049@thorin.cs.unc.edu>
Date: 5 Feb 88 16:35:42 GMT
References: <168@eos.UUCP> <1503@winchester.mips.COM>
Sender: news@thorin.cs.unc.edu
Reply-To: davis@cs.unc.edu (Mark Davis)
Organization: University Of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Lines: 18
Keywords: Sun 4/110 MIPS CACHE Processor-clock-rate
Summary: Cache ?? and sun */1** vs */2**

In article <1503@winchester.mips.COM> mash@winchester.UUCP (John Mashey) writes:
>
>	b) A clock rate scaling is at best a gross estimate, ESPECIALLY
>	for heavily-cached RISC machines.  From the data given, one doesn't
>	know whether or not there's a cache,

Isn't cache the real issue.  Sun 3/200's have different memory systems
than sun 3/100's (cache).  Maybe to get the correct rating, you should
multiply:

10 {sun 4/260 mips} * 14/16.67 {clock ratio} 2 / 4 {sun 3/160 vs 3/260 mips}
= 4.2 mips

The Sun 3/110 and 3/260 numbers are from MIPS December report (rounded).
I agree with John; lets find out more about the architecture and run
some benchmarks.

Thanks - Mark (davis@cs.unc.edu)