Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!pasteur!agate!bionet!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!uxc!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!uxg.cso.uiuc.edu!uxe.cso.uiuc.edu!mcdonald
From: mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: (was) serious code generation b
Message-ID: <226000055@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 25 Jan 89 14:19:00 GMT
References: <11494@haddock.ima.isc.com>
Lines: 21
Nf-ID: #R:haddock.ima.isc.com:11494:uxe.cso.uiuc.edu:226000055:000:1033
Nf-From: uxe.cso.uiuc.edu!mcdonald    Jan 25 08:19:00 1989



>"Even on microcomputers" is incorrect.
>The compilers for PCs and Macs are MUCH better than for larger
>machines.  It even makes sense.  There is more money in it.

The compilers are not better than those for VAXes (real VMS Vaxes).
They are not even equal, but they are close. Vaxes are crippled be a
very slow call instruction. I have benchmarked lots (LOTS) of
machines and only million dollar Vaxes beat the best PC's. 68020
(and the first crop of 68030) machines are not as fast as they best
80386 boxes. Later 68030 machines might catch up. On the other
hand, the RISC machines from Sun and Mips are indeed MUCH faster,
and, for bottom of the line machines only, more cost effective.

(Please note that I'm not trying to start the chip wars over again:
the 68000 series and the 808x series are in fact tied for all
practical purposes.) But you are indeed welcome to feel offended
if you sell Vaxes: our brand new VAXstation 3100 ($40000) was
handily beat by a $5500 PC clone. I'm going to benchmark a Next today.
Stay tuned.