Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!pyramid!amdcad!tim
From: tim@amdcad.AMD.COM (Tim Olson)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: missing Dhrystone 2.1 (1 of 3 &
Message-ID: <22406@amdcad.AMD.COM>
Date: 19 Jul 88 19:06:16 GMT
References: <4232@cbmvax.UUCP> <76700035@p.cs.uiuc.edu> <1988Jul18.231331.19575@utzoo.uucp>
Reply-To: tim@delirun.amd.com (Tim Olson)
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices
Lines: 17
Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:

In article <1988Jul18.231331.19575@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
| In article <76700035@p.cs.uiuc.edu> gillies@p.cs.uiuc.edu writes:
| >I certainly find it hard to believe that the top of the line Amdahl
| >machine achieves 90,000+ Dhrystones...
| > It nearly doubles the performance of the best Cray compiler
| >reported (admittedly, compiling C for a Cray is probably hard, but
| >Crays are very decent scaler machines!  sheesh)...
| 
| Ah, but Crays are *not* good character machines, and Dhrystone is known
| to be excessively string-intensive.

And the Amdahl machine referenced is a dual-processor model -- I assume
that this was 45K Dhrystones per processor...

-- 
	-- Tim Olson
	Advanced Micro Devices
	(tim@delirun.amd.com)