ong@d.cs.okstate.edu (ONG ENG TENG) (01/02/91)
Just got my 386SX up and running. I notice at 8MHz, the S.I. index returns 7.1, while at 16MHz, the S.I. index returns 15.3. Even my cheapy XT-286 at 8MHz returns 8.4. I was warned that the 386SX is slightly slower MHz to MHz compared to 286, does anyone have any comment? E. Teng Ong (ong@d.cs.okstate.edu)
silver@xrtll.uucp (Hi Ho Silver) (01/06/91)
In article <1991Jan2.132537.26991@d.cs.okstate.edu> ong@d.cs.okstate.edu (ONG ENG TENG) writes:
$Just got my 386SX up and running. I notice at 8MHz, the S.I. index
$returns 7.1, while at 16MHz, the S.I. index returns 15.3. Even my
$cheapy XT-286 at 8MHz returns 8.4. I was warned that the 386SX is slightly
$slower MHz to MHz compared to 286, does anyone have any comment?
1. It seems that the warning was correct.
2. The use of benchmarks (and, particularly, only one benchmark) does not
mean that for your uses, system A will be better than system B.
3. Norton's SI tends to be a little skewed in favour of more powerful
CPUs. My 386/22, for example, returns 23.0, when 10-15 would be a
more reasonable number for most purposes (but see #2 above).
--
__ __ _ | ...!nexus.yorku.edu!xrtll!silver | always
(__ | | | | |_ |_) >----------------------------------< searching
__) | |_ \/ |__ | \ | if you don't like my posts, type | for
_____________________/ find / -print|xargs cat|compress | SNTF