ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Kubaitis) (10/29/89)
Attached is yet-another-benchmark that might cast some light on aspects
of architecture. As with all benchmarks, there is a very serious question
of relevance to one's own applications. However, unlike many others, it
is small enough to see in detail what is being measured.
The numbers reported are trips/processor_second through the loop below. The
calculation does not seem to lend itself to vector/parallel enhancements.
int W, H, np, mxp, nP, mxP;
double A, B, C;
char *bmap;
hopalong() {
int wc=W/8, cx=W/2, cy=H/2, ix, iy;
double x=0, y=0, xx, yy, t;
while (np < mxp && ++nP < mxP) {
t = sqrt(fabs(B*x-C));
xx = y - ( (x<0) ? t : -t );
yy = A - x;
x = xx; y = yy;
ix = cx + x; iy = cy + y;
if (ix>-1 && iy>-1 && ix<(W-1) && iy<(H-1)) {
bmap[iy*wc+(ix>>3)] |= 1<<(ix&7);
np++;
}
}
}
It's building a bitmap of a fractal to display in an X root window.
(Barry Martin algorithm published in A.K. Dewdney's "Computer Recreations"
in the September 86 Scientific American.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
From: ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Kubaitis)
Subject: xfroot timing update
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 89 13:14:51 GMT
Here is the 4th updated list of xfroot fractal-points/processor_second
measured on various clients. The number, a count of trips/second
through the 9 line "hopalong" loop in xfroot, is a rough index of scalar
double-precision floating point uniprocessor speed. The lower number
represents a case where nearly all points are in-range and thus require
additional integer arithmetic, bit manipulation, and memory accesses to
record the point. The higher number reflects a case when most points are
out of range and most time is spent in floating point arithmetic. The
numbers in parentheses are VAX 780 equivalents. "*" indicates values for
a single processor. New items since the last posting are marked with ">".
Cray 2 (scc) 304000 (56.2) 619000(100.3)*
Cray Y-MP (scc) 316000 (58.4) 476000 (77.1)*
Cray X-MP (scc) 283000 (52.3) 415000 (67.3)*
Cray X-MP (cc) 157000 (29.0) 194000 (31.4)*
Cray 2 (cc) 129000 (23.8) 183000 (29.7)*
Convex C2 (gcc) 117000 (21.6) 151000 (24.5)*
Convex C2 (vc3/fastmath) 108000 (20.0) 138000 (22.4)*
Convex C2 (vc3) 99000 (18.3) 118000 (19.1)*
DEC DS5800 95000 (17.6) 115000 (18.6)*
HP9000/835CHX 66000 (12.2) 92000 (14.9)
DEC DS5400 77000 (14.2) 91000 (14.7)
DEC DS3100 58000 (10.7) 75000 (12.2)
> Solbourne Series5 Cypress 58000 (10.7) 67000 (10.9)
Gould NP1 44000 (8.1) 60000 (9.7)*
DEC Vax 6400 (vcc) 50000 (9.2) 57000 (9.2)
Convex C2 (vc2) 49000 (9.1) 55000 (8.9)*
Convex C2 (cc) 41000 (7.6) 47000 (7.6)*
Dec Vax 8650 28000 (5.2) 33000 (5.3)
Sun Sparcstation 1 ~25000 (4.6) ??? (???)
HP9000/370 (ffpa) 24000 (4.4) 28000 (4.5)
Titan 22800 (4.2) 27100 (4.4)
DEC MV3900 (vcc) 22900 (4.2) 26100 (4.2)
DG AViiON (88k 16.7 MHz) 17200 (3.2) 24200 (3.9)
Sun 4/260 21100 (3.9) 23600 (3.8)
Dec Vax 8530 19700 (3.6) 23200 (3.8)
Sun 4/280 ~21000 (3.9) ~23000 (3.7)
Dec Vax 8600 19700 (3.6) 22400 (3.6)
DEC Vax 6220 16800 (3.1) 19200 (3.1)
DEC MV3200 (vcc) 15400 (2.8) 17500 (2.8)
IBM RT 135 (-f2 -lfm) 15200 (2.8) 17400 (2.8)
DEC MV3600 (vcc) 14500 (2.7) 17400 (2.8)
HP9000/370 15900 (2.9) 17300 (2.8)
IBM RT125 (afpa) 13900 (2.6) 16000 (2.6)
HP9000/360 13700 (2.5) 15200 (2.5)
DEC Vaxserver 3500 13200 (2.4) 15200 (2.5)
Dec Vaxstation 3100 13000 (2.4) 15100 (2.4)
> Sun 386i/250 Weitek (cc) 14000 (2.6) 14800 (2.4)
Sun 3/60 (-O4 lib/f68881) 12900 (2.4) 14000 (2.3)
> Sun 3/50 (gcc 68881) 10500 (1.9) 12700 (2.1)
IBM RT 135 10600 (2.0) 11500 (1.9)
HP9000/350 10500 (1.9) 11500 (1.9)
Sequent Symmetry 9900 (1.8) 10500 (1.7)*
Sun 3/60 (-f 68881) 8000 (1.5) 8750 (1.4)
386/25 + 387 (cc 386/ix) 7000 (1.3) 8200 (1.3)
HP9000/330 (HP-UX 6.5 cc) 7280 (1.3) 7910 (1.3)
IBM RT 125 7200 (1.3) 7600 (1.2)
DEC Vaxstation 2000/vcc 5530 (1.0) 6330 (1.0)
HP9000/330 5730 (1.1) 6230 (1.0)
386/25 + 387 (gcc) 6000 (1.1) 6200 (1.0)
DEC Vax 780 5410 (1.0) 6170 (1.0)
HP9000/320 5580 (1.0) 6150 (1.0)
Sun 3/50 (-f 68881) 5480 (1.0) 6080 (1.0)
DEC Vaxstation 2000 4670 (0.9) 5530 (0.9)
DEC MVII (cc) 4160 (0.8) 5210 (0.8)
DEC MVII (vcc) 4080 (0.8) 5070 (0.8)
Sun 3/60 1960 (0.4) 2060 (0.3)
Sun 3/50 1270 (0.2) 1330 (0.2)
Sun 3/160 (no fpa) ??? (???) ~950 (0.2)
> Sun 2/120 (no fpu - cc) 530 (0.1) 560 (0.1)
DEC Vax 730 340 (0.1) 360 (0.1)
386/25 (386/ix - no 387) 259 (0.0) 260 (0.0)
A few notes on the results: the Cray scc compiler uses the same backend
as their Fortran compiler. gcc enhancements are due to inline code for
sqrt and fabs. The three top Convex C2 measurements use compilers/libraries
that exploit the C2 hardware sqrt. It pays to shop around for the best
compiler/options/libraries available for your floating point intensive code.
Thanks to: bav@hobbes.ksu.ksu.edu, bryan%kewill@uunet.uu.net, bt@irfu.se,
csmith@convex.com, csu@alembic.acs.com, eric@geology.tn.cornell,
dave@rutgers.edu, evans@decvax.dec.com, glenn@mathcs.emory.edu,
harrison@decwrl.dec.com, hleroy@erisa.fr, howard@aic.hrl.hac.com,
hrp@boring.cray.com, idallen@watgcl.waterloo.edu, jpb@sn2024.cray.com,
jw@pan.uucp, kline@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu, markw@airgun.wg.waii.com,
paul@db0tui66.bitnet, rauletta@gmuvax2.gmu.edu, skam@solbourne.com,
steved@longs.lance.colostate.edu, tac@csl.ncsu.edu, tpf@jdyx.uucp,
for sharing their results.
I would appreciate hearing about measurements on other clients, or results
differing significantly from those above. To perform your own:
1. Get xfroot/part01 (V5-I3) and xfroot/patch1(V5-I7) from
comp.sources.x. These are available via anonymous ftp from
uunet.uu.net. While they will eventually be found there in
comp.sources.x/volume5, as of this writing they are in
comp.sources.x/new/890924.0.Z and 890929.0. If you don't
have ftp access to uunet.uu.net, I will be happy to mail
a copy (~700 lines.)
2. Install xfroot on the client to be tested, taking care
that you have verified the definition of HZ in xfroot.c.
(See the README.)
3. Make the following two runs:
xfroot -a 0.1 -b 0.1 -c 0.1 (lower bound)
xfroot -a 3000 -b 3000 -c 3000 (upper bound)
-------------------------
Ed Kubaitis (ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu)
Computing Services Office - University of Illinois, Urbanaejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Kubaitis) (11/13/89)
Here is an updated list of results. Thanks for the responses.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attached is yet-another-benchmark that might cast some light on aspects
of architecture. As with all benchmarks, there is a very serious question
of relevance to one's own applications. However, unlike many others, it
is small enough to see in detail what is being measured.
The numbers reported are trips/processor_second through the loop below. The
calculation does not seem to lend itself to vector/parallel enhancements.
int W, H, np, mxp, nP, mxP;
double A, B, C;
char *bmap;
hopalong() {
int wc=W/8, cx=W/2, cy=H/2, ix, iy;
double x=0, y=0, xx, yy, t;
while (np < mxp && ++nP < mxP) {
t = sqrt(fabs(B*x-C));
xx = y - ( (x<0) ? t : -t );
yy = A - x;
x = xx; y = yy;
ix = cx + x; iy = cy + y;
if (ix>-1 && iy>-1 && ix<(W-1) && iy<(H-1)) {
bmap[iy*wc+(ix>>3)] |= 1<<(ix&7);
np++;
}
}
}
It's building a bitmap of a fractal to display in an X root window.
(Barry Martin algorithm published in A.K. Dewdney's "Computer Recreations"
in the September 86 Scientific American.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
From: ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Kubaitis)
Subject: xfroot timing update
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 89 15:36:56 GMT
Here is the 6th updated list of xfroot fractal-points/processor_second
measured on various clients. The number, a count of trips/second
through the 9 line "hopalong" loop in xfroot, is a rough index of scalar
double-precision floating point uniprocessor speed. The lower number
represents a case where nearly all points are in-range and thus require
additional integer arithmetic, bit manipulation, and memory accesses to
record the point. The higher number reflects a case when most points are
out of range and most time is spent in floating point arithmetic.
Key: () : Vax 780 equivalents
* : For a single processor
+ : Using hardware square root
> : New since last posting
304000 (56.2) 619000(100.3)* Cray 2 (scc)
316000 (58.4) 476000 (77.1)* Cray Y-MP (scc)
283000 (52.3) 415000 (67.3)* Cray X-MP (scc)
185000 (34.2) 263000 (42.6)*+ > Apollo DN10000 (See note below)
143000 (26.4) 195000 (31.6)*+ ETA-10 G
157000 (29.0) 194000 (31.4)* Cray X-MP (cc)
129000 (23.8) 183000 (29.7)* Cray 2 (cc)
174000 (32.2) 182000 (29.5)* > Amdahl 5990
115000 (21.3) 170000 (27.6)* > Apollo DN10000 (-D_BUILTINS)
117000 (21.6) 151000 (24.5)*+ Convex C2 (gcc)
108000 (20.0) 144000 (23.3) SGI Iris 4D/240 (-lfastm)
108000 (20.0) 138000 (22.4)*+ Convex C2 (vc3/fastmath)
99000 (18.3) 118000 (19.1)*+ Convex C2 (vc3)
95000 (17.6) 115000 (18.6) DEC DS5800
89000 (16.5) 111000 (18.0) SGI Iris 4D/240
73000 (13.5) 94000 (15.2)+ Sun 4/370 (f77/libm.i1)
66000 (12.2) 92000 (14.9) HP9000/835CHX
78000 (14.4) 92000 (14.9) > Sony NWS-3860
77000 (14.2) 91000 (14.7) DEC DS5400
58000 (10.7) 75000 (12.2) DEC DS3100
61000 (11.3) 70000 (11.3) Tektronix XD88/30
52000 (9.6) 69000 (11.2)+ Sun 4/280
58000 (10.7) 67000 (10.9) Solbourne Series5 Cypress
49000 (9.1) 60000 (9.7)* Gould NP1
50000 (9.2) 57000 (9.2) DEC Vax 6400 (vcc)
49000 (9.1) 55000 (8.9)* Convex C2 (vc2)
45000 (8.3) 54000 (8.8) SGI Iris 4D/70-GT
43000 (7.9) 53000 (8.6) > Sun SPARCstation 1 (see note below)
42000 (7.8) 48000 (7.8) Sun 4/370 (libm.i1)
41000 (7.6) 47000 (7.6)* Convex C2 (cc)
41000 (7.6) 47000 (7.6) Sun 4/370
28000 (5.2) 33000 (5.3) Dec Vax 8650
28000 (5.2) 33000 (5.3) > Stellar GS 2000 (-O2)
26500 (4.9) 30300 (4.9) > Mac II (w/ Siclone 3033)
20800 (3.8) 28900 (4.7) Sun SPARCstation 1 (see note below)
24000 (4.4) 28000 (4.5) HP9000/370 (ffpa)
24700 (4.6) 27800 (4.5) Sun SPARCstation 1 (gcc)
22800 (4.2) 27100 (4.4) Titan
22900 (4.2) 26100 (4.2) DEC MV3900 (vcc)
19900 (3.7) 25200 (4.1) Sun SPARCstation 1
17200 (3.2) 24200 (3.9) DG AViiON (88k 16.7 MHz)
22300 (4.1) 23700 (3.8) 386/33 + 387 (cc 386/ix)
21100 (3.9) 23600 (3.8) Sun 4/260
20100 (3.7) 23400 (3.8)* Sequent Symmetry (fpa)
19700 (3.6) 23200 (3.8) Dec Vax 8530
21000 (3.9) 23000 (3.7) Sun 4/280
19700 (3.6) 22400 (3.6) Dec Vax 8600
19500 (3.6) 21600 (3.5) > Apollo DN4500 (-D_BUILTINS)
16800 (3.1) 19200 (3.1) DEC Vax 6220
16800 (3.1) 17600 (2.9) 386/33 + 387 (gcc 1.35)
15400 (2.8) 17500 (2.8) DEC MV3200 (vcc)
15200 (2.8) 17400 (2.8) IBM RT 135 (-f2 -lfm)
14500 (2.7) 17400 (2.8) DEC MV3600 (vcc)
15900 (2.9) 17300 (2.8) HP9000/370
13800 (2.6) 16100 (2.6) > Apollo DN3550 (-D_BUILTINS)
13900 (2.6) 16000 (2.6) IBM RT125 (afpa)
13800 (2.6) 15900 (2.6) > Apollo DN3500 (-D_BUILTINS)
13700 (2.5) 15200 (2.5) HP9000/360
13200 (2.4) 15200 (2.5) DEC Vaxserver 3500
13000 (2.4) 15100 (2.4) Dec Vaxstation 3100
14000 (2.6) 14800 (2.4) Sun 386i/250 Weitek (cc)
12900 (2.4) 14000 (2.3) Sun 3/60 (-O4 lib/f68881)
11900 (2.2) 13200 (2.1) > Apollo DN4000 (-D_BUILTINS)
11000 (2.0) 12900 (2.1) > Apollo DN2500 (-D_BUILTINS)
10500 (1.9) 12700 (2.1) Sun 3/50 (gcc 68881)
9700 (1.8) 12100 (2.0) > Mac II
10600 (2.0) 11500 (1.9) IBM RT 135
10500 (1.9) 11500 (1.9) HP9000/350
9900 (1.8) 10500 (1.7)* Sequent Symmetry
9200 (1.7) 9700 (1.6) IBM RT 115 (4.3BSD High C 2.1)
8000 (1.5) 8750 (1.4) Sun 3/60 (-f 68881)
7930 (1.5) 8670 (1.4) > HP9000/340
7000 (1.3) 8200 (1.3) 386/25 + 387 (cc 386/ix)
7300 (1.3) 8000 (1.3) IBM RT 115 (4.3BSD High C 1.4)
7280 (1.3) 7910 (1.3) HP9000/330 (HP-UX 6.5 cc)
7200 (1.3) 7600 (1.2) IBM RT 125
5530 (1.0) 6330 (1.0) DEC Vaxstation 2000/vcc
5730 (1.1) 6230 (1.0) HP9000/330
6000 (1.1) 6200 (1.0) 386/25 + 387 (gcc)
5410 (1.0) 6170 (1.0) DEC Vax 780
5580 (1.0) 6150 (1.0) HP9000/320
5560 (1.0) 6120 (1.0) > Apollo DN3000 (-D_BUILTINS)
5480 (1.0) 6080 (1.0) Sun 3/50 (-f 68881)
4670 (0.9) 5530 (0.9) DEC Vaxstation 2000
4160 (0.8) 5210 (0.8) DEC MVII (cc)
4080 (0.8) 5070 (0.8) DEC MVII (vcc)
1960 (0.4) 2060 (0.3) Sun 3/60
1270 (0.2) 1330 (0.2) Sun 3/50
??? (???) 950 (0.2) Sun 3/160 (no fpa)
530 (0.1) 560 (0.1) Sun 2/120 (no fpu - cc)
340 (0.1) 360 (0.1) DEC Vax 730
259 (0.0) 260 (0.0) 386/25 (386/ix - no 387)
A few notes on the results:
o The top DN10000 timings used the PRISM 6.7(359) compiler with
the following options: -opt 4 -cpu a88k -def sqrt=_builtin_sqrt
-def fabs=_builtin_fabs.
o Two SPARCstation results using sqrt.i1 and libm.i1 were reported.
The only difference appeared to be that the faster one was compiled
and linked in one step. Can anyone enlighten us on this?
o The Cray scc compiler uses the same backend as their Fortran.
o gcc enhancements are due to inline code for sqrt & fabs.
o Strikingly different results for the same system show that it pays to
shop around for the best compiler/options/libraries available.
Thanks to: archer@sgi.com, bauer@loligo.cc.fsu.edu, bav@hobbes.ksu.ksu.edu,
bryan%kewill@uunet.uu.net, bt@irfu.se, casey@gauss.llnl.gov, csmith@convex.com,
csu@alembic.acs.com, eric@geology.tn.cornell, dave@rutgers.edu,
david@torsqnt.uucp, evans@decvax.dec.com, garyc@quasi.wv.tek.com,
glenn@mathcs.emory.edu, harrison@decwrl.dec.com, hleroy@erisa.fr,
howard@aic.hrl.hac.com, hrp@boring.cray.com, idallen@watgcl.waterloo.edu,
jpb@sn2024.cray.com, jw@pan.uucp, ken@cs.toronto.edu, kline@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu,
ksp@maxwell.nde.swri.edu, kucharsk@uts.amdahl.com, lnz@lucid.com,
mark@zok.uucp,
markw@airgun.wg.waii.com, michael@ws.sony.co.jp, moraes@csri.toronto.edu,
paul@db0tui66.bitnet, rauletta@gmuvax2.gmu.edu, skam@solbourne.com,
sommerfeld@apollo.com, steved@longs.lance.colostate.edu, tac@csl.ncsu.edu,
thp@westhawk.uucp, tony@popserver.stanford.edu, tpf@jdyx.uucp,
wesommer@athena.mit.edu, zimet@sequoia.berkeley.edu, for sharing their results.
(Please assume the standard disclaimers for all.)
I would appreciate hearing about measurements on other clients, or results
differing significantly from those above. To perform your own:
1. Get xfroot/part01 (V5-I3) and xfroot/patch1(V5-I7) from
comp.sources.x. These are available via anonymous ftp from
uunet.uu.net. While they will eventually be found there in
comp.sources.x/volume5, as of this writing they are in
comp.sources.x/new/890924.0.Z and 890929.0. If you don't
have ftp access to uunet.uu.net, I will be happy to mail
a copy (~700 lines.)
2. Install xfroot on the client to be tested, taking care
that you have verified the definition of HZ in xfroot.c.
(See the README.)
3. Make the following two runs:
xfroot -a 0.1 -b 0.1 -c 0.1 (lower bound)
xfroot -a 3000 -b 3000 -c 3000 (upper bound)
Please mention any details (compilers/libraries/options) you think are
relevant.
-------------------------
Ed Kubaitis (ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu)
Computing Services Office - University of Illinois, Urbanapb@idca.tds.PHILIPS.nl (Peter Brouwer) (11/13/89)
In article <1989Nov12.160221.26921@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Kubaitis) writes: >Attached is yet-another-benchmark that might cast some light on aspects >of architecture. As with all benchmarks, there is a very serious question >of relevance to one's own applications. However, unlike many others, it >is small enough to see in detail what is being measured. > > hopalong() { > int wc=W/8, cx=W/2, cy=H/2, ix, iy; > double x=0, y=0, xx, yy, t; > Is there a reason that no register declarations are used. I think this setup also introduces an dependency on compilers. I know lost of people think a compiler should do the register setup but in my opinion I programmer should always do the thinking. He knows ( at least should know ) which variables need register declarations. A compiler can never detect the critical loops in a program and might give a wrong variable a register declaration. This is very likely for CPU's that cannot handle a fair number of register declarations , like the 386 ( Our compiler can handle 3, one more should be possible). -- Peter Brouwer, # Philips Telecommunications and Data Systems, NET : pb@idca.tds.philips.nl # Department SSP-P9000 Building V2, UUCP : ....!mcvax!philapd!pb # P.O.Box 245, 7300AE Apeldoorn, The Netherlands. PHONE:ext [+31] [0]55 432523, # Never underestimate the power of human stupidity Newsgroups: yet-another-benchmark Subject: Re: yet-another-benchmark Summary: Expires: References: <1989Nov12.160221.26921@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> Sender: Reply-To: Followup-To: Distribution: Organization: Philips Telecommunication and Data Systems, The Netherlands Keywords: In article <1989Nov12.160221.26921@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Kubaitis) writes: >Here is an updated list of results. Thanks for the responses. >------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Attached is yet-another-benchmark that might cast some light on aspects >of architecture. As with all benchmarks, there is a very serious question >of relevance to one's own applications. However, unlike many others, it >is small enough to see in detail what is being measured. > > hopalong() { > int wc=W/8, cx=W/2, cy=H/2, ix, iy; > double x=0, y=0, xx, yy, t; > Is there a reason that no register declarations are used. I think this setup also introduces an dependency on compilers. I know lost of people think a compiler should do the register setup but in my opinion I programmer should always do the thinking. He knows ( at least should know ) which variables need register declarations. A compiler can never detect the critical loops in a program and might give a wrong variable a register declaration. This is very likely for CPU's that cannot handle a fair number of register declarations , like the 386 ( Our compiler can handle 3, one more should be possible). -- Peter Brouwer, # Philips Telecommunications and Data Systems, NET : pb@idca.tds.philips.nl # Department SSP-P9000 Building V2, UUCP : ....!mcvax!philapd!pb # P.O.Box 245, 7300AE Apeldoorn, The Netherlands. PHONE:ext [+31] [0]55 432523, # Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Kubaitis) (11/20/89)
The 7th update of xfroot timings is available. These timings provide a rough
index of scalar double-precision floating point uniprocessor speed on dozens
of X clients spanning three orders of magnitude in processor speed. In addition
to many new and revised timings, this update includes information on under-
estimates of faster systems identified in previous xfroot timings. The update
is available:
1. Via anonymous ftp to uxc.cso.uiuc.edu in pub/xfroot/timings
2. Via email request to ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu. Indicate if you wish to
be on a mailing list for future updates.
-------------------------
Ed Kubaitis (ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu)
Computing Services Office - University of Illinois, Urbanaejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Kubaitis) (11/27/89)
The 8th update of xfroot timings is available. These timings provide a rough
index of scalar double-precision floating point uniprocessor speed on dozens
of X clients spanning three orders of magnitude in processor speed. This update
has new or revised timings for the Cray Y-MP, Stardent 3000, Titan, Gould NP1,
Stellar GS2000 and Tektronix XD88/10. The timings are available:
1. Via anonymous ftp to uxc.cso.uiuc.edu in pub/xfroot/timings
2. Via email request to ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu. Indicate if you wish to
be on a mailing list for future updates.
-------------------------
Ed Kubaitis (ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu)
Computing Services Office - University of Illinois, Urbanaejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Kubaitis) (12/11/89)
The 9th update of xfroot timings is available. These timings provide a rough
index of scalar double-precision floating point uniprocessor speed on dozens
of X clients spanning three orders of magnitude in processor speed. This update
has new or revised timings for the Stardent 3000, Titan, and GS2000, Convex C2
with "ESP" feature, MIPS R2000, IBM RT135/EAFPA, ISI V24K, and Vax 750. The
timings are available:
1. Via anonymous ftp to uxc.cso.uiuc.edu in pub/xfroot/timings
2. Via email request to ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu. Indicate if you wish to
be on a mailing list for future updates.ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Kubaitis) (12/18/89)
The 10th update of xfroot timings is available. These timings (by over 50
contributors in 8 countries) provide a rough index of scalar double-precision
floating point uniprocessor speed on dozens of X clients spanning three orders
of magnitude in processor speed. New or revised in this update: MIPS M/120,
M/2000, M/180; DEC 5810, 3100, 8650, 3900, & 6280; CADMUS 68020, R2000 and
80860 based systems. The timings are available:
1. Via anonymous ftp to uxc.cso.uiuc.edu in pub/xfroot/timings
2. Via email request to ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu. Indicate if you wish to
be on a mailing list for future updates.ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Kubaitis) (01/07/90)
The 11th update of xfroot timings is available. These timings provide a rough
index of scalar double-precision floating point uniprocessor speed. The timings
have been reported by over 50 contributors in 8 countries on dozens of systems
(most of them X clients) spanning three orders of magnitude in processor speed.
New or revised in this update: Cray Y-MP; Convex C2 ESP; DEC 5810; Solbourne
Cypress; MIPS RC2030; Alliant FX/80; NeXT; Pyramid 98x, 90x. The timings
are available:
1. Via anonymous ftp to uxc.cso.uiuc.edu in pub/xfroot/timings
2. Via email request to ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu. Indicate if you wish to
be on a mailing list for future updates.ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Kubaitis) (02/23/90)
The 12th update of xfroot timings is available. These timings provide a rough
index of scalar double-precision floating point uniprocessor speed. The timings
have been reported by over 50 contributors in 8 countries on dozens of systems
(most of them X clients) spanning three orders of magnitude in processor speed.
New or revised in this update: IBM RS/6000 320 and 530, Solbourne Cypress,
Sun 4/390, Sun 4/60, Cadmus 9933/RC, MIPS M-120. The timings are available:
1. Via anonymous ftp to uxc.cso.uiuc.edu in pub/xfroot/timings
2. Via email request to ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu. Indicate if you wish to
be on a mailing list for future updates.ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Kubaitis) (03/04/90)
The 13th update of xfroot timings is available. These timings provide a rough
index of scalar double-precision floating point uniprocessor speed. The timings
have been reported by over 60 contributors in 8 countries on dozens of systems
(most of them X clients) spanning three orders of magnitude in processor speed.
New in this update: Multiflow Trace 14/300, IBM PS/2 (386 & 486), Sun 3/460,
Sequent Balance (NS32000). The timings are available:
1. Via anonymous ftp to uxc.cso.uiuc.edu in pub/xfroot/timings
2. Via email request to ejk@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu. Indicate if you wish to
be on a mailing list for future updates.ejk@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Ed Kubaitis) (03/18/90)
The 14th update of xfroot timings is available. These timings provide a rough
index of scalar double-precision floating point uniprocessor speed. The timings
have been reported by over 60 contributors in 8 countries on dozens of systems
(most of them X clients) spanning three orders of magnitude in processor speed.
New or revised in this update: Sun 3/470, 3/80, 3/260; Bull DPS 9000, DPS 8/49;
IBM RS/6000 320. The timings are available:
1. Via anonymous ftp to uxc.cso.uiuc.edu in pub/xfroot/timings
2. Via email request to ejk@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu. Indicate if you wish to
be on a mailing list for future updates.