Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ames!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!mit-eddie!mit-amt!hkbirke
From: hkbirke@mit-amt (Hal Birkeland)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: "CISC MIPS" ...  was "The NeXT Problem"
Summary: VAX MIPS
Message-ID: <3188@mit-amt>
Date: 20 Oct 88 00:09:22 GMT
References: <26435@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <5498@juniper.uucp> <6119@quacky.mips.COM>
Organization: MIT Media Lab, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 21

NOTE: this article was originally posted in alt.next... I have replied here
since alt.next should be disappearing soon...

In article <6119@quacky.mips.COM>, dennis@mips.COM (Dennis Franklin) writes:
> In article <5498@juniper.uucp> chari@juniper.UUCP (Christopher Michael Whatley) writes:
> >... Doesn't 20 RISC MIPS equal about 5 CISC MIPS?
> >
> The "MIPS" figure that is published by RISC chip/computer manufacturers
> IS what you term "CISC MIPS".  It is usually stated as "VAX MIPS". I.e.,
> 1 VAX 11/750 = 1 MIP.

well, almost (actually a real good try). But according to DEC's pamphlets
dating from the 11/7xx series machines, the 11/750 was not rated at 1.0
MIPS but at .7 MIPS.  The 11/780 was rated at 1.0 VAX MIPS.

For comparison, a uVax II is a 0.7 MIPS machine. Just remember that 
processor speed isn't everything, i/o bandwith is also important (not
that NeXT's have problems here).

--hal
{backbone}!mit-amt!hkbirke
hkbirke@media-lab.media.mit.edu