randy@petfe.UUCP (Randy Banton) (05/13/85)
Has anyone run the BYTE benchmarks on a 68020 based system with UNIX System V yet?? (Motorola guys, are you listening?) I have a benchmark paper from the Intel literature group which claims a 6Mhz 80286 is 1.38 a 10Mhz 68010. The 286 machines were the Intel 286/310 and IBM PC/AT. The 68010 machines were a Sun 2/120 and a Masscomp workstation. Next they determined that a 10Mhz 80286 (0 wait states) is 2.85 times the same 10Mhz 68010 machines. Note these times are all measured on real machines (as opposed to paper calculations). The 10Mhz 80286 is also rated as equal to the 16Mhz 68020. The 68020 assumptions were zero wait states and that a 16Mhz 68020 was 2.84 times a 10Mhz 68010 (i.e. no real 020 system). They finally extrapolate that a 12.5Mhz 80286 (0 wait states) is 1.27 times a 16Mhz 68020 (0 wait states). Without arguing the merits of benchmarks, has anyone run any of the "common" benchmarks a 16Mhz (or 12.5Mhz) 68020 system? (For those who haven't seen it, Intel had a two page color ad about the results mentioned above. It was is Electronic News, I believe May 6, 1985. The report I mention is called "iAPX 286 High Performance Benchmark Study Report" and is dated April 1985.) Randy
caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX) (05/15/85)
The unmentioned gotcha in Intel's benchmark comparisions is the ages old apples-vs-oranges comparision trick. Most 68k C compilers use 32 bit ints and true 32 bit addresses. Most 8086 and 80286 C compilers don't support this combination. For a fair comparision, you MUST compile with the "HUGE" model which allows for objects >64k. That means Lattice Large Model or Microsoft HUGE model. Even these aren't fair comparision as the stack space is still limited to 64k on the 8086 chips but not on 68k. I have an up to date comparision of sieve benchmarks (slightly modified from the BYTE code) on Telegodzilla as "bench/siev.doc". The source is available as "bench/siev.c". Telegodzilla is at 503-621-3746 1200, 300 bps. Hit RETURN untilthe system recognizes your speed. -- Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX ..!tektronix!reed!omen!caf Omen Technology Inc 17505-V NW Sauvie IS RD Portland OR 97231 Voice: 503-621-3406 Modem: 503-621-3746 (Hit CR's for speed detect)
dan@rna.UUCP (Dan Ts'o) (05/16/85)
In article <> randy@petfe.UUCP (Randy Banton) writes: >I have a benchmark paper from the Intel literature group which >claims a 6Mhz 80286 is 1.38 a 10Mhz 68010. The 286 machines >were the Intel 286/310 and IBM PC/AT. The 68010 machines were >a Sun 2/120 and a Masscomp workstation. Well I haven't had a chance to run benchmarks on a real 68020 system, but I have run benchmarks on an Intel 286/380, an IBM PC/AT and a Masscomp and a Callan. Except the for the PC/AT the results were posted in my previous postings along with a dozen other machines all relative to a 4.2BSD VAX 780. If you would like to see those results, please let me know. Here are just the results for the three machines (VAX 780 == 1.0), all running UNIX/XENIX. Intel 286 PC/AT Masscomp Callan LOOP .16 .19 .38 .40 CC LOOP .17 .20 .38 .13 SIEVE .56 .66 .57 .59 CC SIEVE .19 .22 .4 .15 FLOAT .0029 .0027 .030 (.41) .031 GETPID .55 .64 .76 .89 GREP .39 .28 .4 .51 COPY .10 .14 .25 .15 NROFF .27 na .4 .29 SORT .41 .38 .5 .47 mean .28 (.30) .30 (.34) .41 (.45) .36 stddev .19 .22 .19 .26 For the 286 and the PC/AT, no floating point chip/support was available. The floating point emulation was abysmal - the mean number in parenthesis do not include the FLOAT benchmark for these machines. The FLOAT benchmark number for the Masscomp in parenthesis is with their floating point processor, which seems to be a considerable help. Note that in comparing the Masscomp to the Callan one should consider that the Masscomp has a cache and a better disk. These results do not substantial Intel's claims in comparing their 80286 to the 68000 or 68010 (unless you plan on running just SIEVEs). I would therefore doubt Intel's claims in comparing the 80286 to the 68020. The 6Mhz 80286 appears to be slightly less than a 68010 at 10Mhz. I don't see how a 10Mhz 80286 could be 2.85 times a 10Mhz 68010. Nevertheless the PC/AT proves to be quite a good price/performer. Cheers, Dan Ts'o Dept. Neurobiology Rockefeller Univ. 1230 York Ave. NY, NY 10021 212-570-7671 ...cmcl2!rna!dan