pf@diab.se (Per Fogelstr|m) (08/21/88)
Just wondering.... Anyone else who has seen the connection Dhrystones / 2 = Claimed mips ?. It work out for nearly all modern processors. Well, what the ... I just thought it was a fun thing.
mash@mips.COM (John Mashey) (08/23/88)
In article <422@ma.diab.se> pf@ma.UUCP (Per Fogelstr|m) writes: >Just wondering.... > >Anyone else who has seen the connection Dhrystones / 2 = Claimed mips ?. > >It work out for nearly all modern processors. >Well, what the ... I just thought it was a fun thing. It's not a terrible rule of thumb, for scalar processors. However, there is enough variation that you should be careful. For example: VAXen: around 1.8 MIP R2000 & HP Precision: both in 2.1-2.4 range (I pick these because we have enough cross-correlations to believe in consistent vax-mip (integer) ratings, and all have good compilers.) Note that there is a 30% variation already from top to bottom. In general, Dhrystone is a good benchmark to use to beat up on VAXEN for relative-performance numbers, especially with a modern RISC with good compilers. -- -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
cth_co@tekn01.chalmers.se (08/23/88)
In article <422@ma.diab.se>, pf@diab.se (Per Fogelstr|m) writes: > Just wondering.... > > Anyone else who has seen the connection Dhrystones / 2 = Claimed mips ?. You mean Dhrystones / 2000 = Mips? > > It work out for nearly all modern processors. > > Well, what the ... I just thought it was a fun thing.
pf@diab.se (Per Fogelstr|m) (08/23/88)
In article <135@tekn01.chalmers.se> cth_co@tekn01.chalmers.se writes: >In article <422@ma.diab.se>, pf@diab.se (Per Fogelstr|m) writes: >> Anyone else who has seen the connection Dhrystones / 2 = Claimed mips ?. > >You mean Dhrystones / 2000 = Mips? Picky eh.... 8-). But yes, that is what i meant.