yap@me.utoronto.ca (Davin Yap) (03/07/90)
Has anyone got a copy of the UNIX benchmarks discussed in the latest
issue of Byte magazine. They're in the Public Domain and I'll make them
available via anonymous ftp if someone is willing to mail them to me.
Regards, Davin
_______________leave_nothing_to_the_imagination_of_those_without_______________
Davin Yap, Mechanical Engineering, U of Toronto
A smile, for me? How nice. yap@me.toronto.edu yap@me.utoronto.bitnet
...{pyramid,uunet}!utai!utme!yap
--mjr@atreus.umiacs.umd.edu (Marcus J. Ranum) (03/07/90)
In article <1990Mar6.163657.7550@me.toronto.edu> yap@me.utoronto.ca (Davin Yap) writes: >Has anyone got a copy of the UNIX benchmarks discussed in the latest >issue of Byte magazine. <snigger> are these benchmarks from the magazine that ues Sieve of Eratosthenes as a compiler benchmark, and a Loutus-1-2-3 spreadsheet as a CPU benchmark ? Or is this the infamous Jerry Pournelle BASIC benchmark re-written in C? ;-) mjr. -- The second law of thermodynamics implies that the expression "good news" is an oxymoron.
mash@mips.COM (John Mashey) (03/07/90)
In article <22943@mimsy.umd.edu> mjr@atreus.umiacs.umd.edu (Marcus J. Ranum) writes: >In article <1990Mar6.163657.7550@me.toronto.edu> yap@me.utoronto.ca (Davin Yap) writes: >>Has anyone got a copy of the UNIX benchmarks discussed in the latest >>issue of Byte magazine. > > <snigger> are these benchmarks from the magazine that ues >Sieve of Eratosthenes as a compiler benchmark, and a Loutus-1-2-3 >spreadsheet as a CPU benchmark ? Sieve is not very interesting, but using a representative Lotus spreadsheet calculation as a CPU benchmark is absolutely fine: it's certainly relevant to what many people do with their computers. -- -john mashey DISCLAIMER: <generic disclaimer, I speak for me only, etc> UUCP: {ames,decwrl,prls,pyramid}!mips!mash OR mash@mips.com DDD: 408-991-0253 or 408-720-1700, x253 USPS: MIPS Computer Systems, 930 E. Arques, Sunnyvale, CA 94086
palowoda@fiver.UUCP (Bob Palowoda) (03/09/90)
From article <22943@mimsy.umd.edu>, by mjr@atreus.umiacs.umd.edu (Marcus J. Ranum): > In article <1990Mar6.163657.7550@me.toronto.edu> yap@me.utoronto.ca (Davin Yap) writes: >>Has anyone got a copy of the UNIX benchmarks discussed in the latest >>issue of Byte magazine. > > <snigger> are these benchmarks from the magazine that ues > Sieve of Eratosthenes as a compiler benchmark, and a Loutus-1-2-3 > spreadsheet as a CPU benchmark ? > > Or is this the infamous Jerry Pournelle BASIC benchmark re-written > in C? > Neither, It seems to be a complete rewrite in C. It takes into account UNIX's multiple processes when bench testing. Here's some of the tests: Dhrystone 2 (with and without register vars) Sequential and Random memory access with incremental array sizes Arithmatic tests (short, long, float, doubles, ints) Process tests (system call overhead, pipe throughput, pipe switch process creation, execl throughput) File system throughput (incremental sizes) Client/Server Database throughput (incremental number of client/servers) I did post the sources, along with compiled executeables for Xenix386 and UNIX 386 on my bbs. The file is 'Bbench.tar.Z' and is located in the unix_bench files area of the bbs. It is approx 800K, so please don't ask me to mail it. ---Bob P.S. <snigger> -- Bob Palowoda indetech!fiver!palowoda *Home of Fiver BBS* login: bbs Home {sun|daisy}!ys2!fiver!palowoda (415)-623-8809 1200/2400 Work {sun|pyramid|decwrl}!megatest!palowoda (415)-623-8806 2400/9600/19200 TB Voice: (415)-623-7495 palowoda@fiver Public access UNIX XBBS
drd@siia.mv.com (David Dick) (03/15/90)
mjr@atreus.umiacs.umd.edu (Marcus J. Ranum) writes: >In article <1990Mar6.163657.7550@me.toronto.edu> yap@me.utoronto.ca (Davin Yap) writes: >>Has anyone got a copy of the UNIX benchmarks discussed in the latest >>issue of Byte magazine. > <snigger> are these benchmarks from the magazine that ues >Sieve of Eratosthenes as a compiler benchmark, and a Loutus-1-2-3 >spreadsheet as a CPU benchmark ? > Or is this the infamous Jerry Pournelle BASIC benchmark re-written >in C? Good benchmarks are hard. Byte hasn't done such a bad job, considering the difficulty. Their benchmarks are *much* better then the feature lists much of the computer "consumer" press has sunk to. David Dick Software Innovations, Inc. [the Software Moving Company(sm)]