jim@hp-pcd.UUCP (Jim Andreas) (11/23/83)
#N:hp-pcd:19500008:000:474 hp-pcd!jim Nov 21 17:30:00 1983 What is the relative performance of a VAX-11/750 relative to a VAX-11/780? I have run a seive of eratosthenes benchmark, and find that the 750 is quite slow - only 25% of the performance of a 780. We do not have a 780, and so I am using the figure for the 780 given in Byte magazine, January 1983, page 298. Does anyone in the usenet community have performance figures on the 780 vs 750 (and the other clones, for that matter)? Jim Andreas hp-pcd\!jim
mike%brl-vgr@sri-unix.UUCP (11/26/83)
From: Mike Muuss <mike@brl-vgr> Ignoring the issues of address space, here is a simple "rule of thumb": VAX 11/780 ~= 1.2 to 1.5 times the CPU speed of a PDP-11/70 VAX 11/750 ~= the CPU speed of a PDP-11/44 VAX 11/730 ~= the CPU speed of a PDP-11/34 -Mike
rbbb.rice%rand-relay@sri-unix.UUCP (11/27/83)
From: David Chase <rbbb.rice@rand-relay> I have found that a 750 CPU = about 40% of a 780 CPU. This is NOT a measure of system performance; this is crunching on a variety of weird (non-FP) things. DEC claims that as a system (running VMS, of course) a 750 is 60% of a 780, and I am willing to believe them. I expect that running unix instead would give you different results, though I'm not sure how different. David Chase, Rice University
sheppard@parsec.UUCP (12/01/83)
#R:hp-pcd:19500008:parsec:44200016:000:188 parsec!sheppard Nov 30 20:37:00 1983 Yeah, the quote that DEC was (is) real fond of making is that the 750 is "60% of the performance of the 780, but at 40% of the cost". Andy Sheppard Parsec Scientific Computer Corporation