Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rlgvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!rlgvax!guy From: guy@rlgvax.UUCP (Guy Harris) Newsgroups: net.arch,net.micro.68k Subject: Re: 68020 Performance Revisited Again Message-ID: <237@rlgvax.UUCP> Date: Tue, 13-Nov-84 02:34:29 EST Article-I.D.: rlgvax.237 Posted: Tue Nov 13 02:34:29 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 14-Nov-84 05:32:52 EST References: <4132@decwrl.UUCP> Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA Lines: 37 > 1. Your idea of cpu-intensive UNIX benchmarks sure is strange; > Gosh, I always thought there was a fairly large I/O component to > cc, nroff, grep, vi, mail, news, etc. Ever timed "cc" or "nroff"? *VERY* CPU-intensive - at least the versions we've got here on our 780. One "make" rebuilding the kernel takes up between 60 and 90% of an 11/780. Also, note he only referred to the aforementioned as '"real" UNIX tasks', not "cpu-intensive UNIX benchmarks." He referred both to CPU-intensive and disk-intensive tasks. > 5. I've spent 8 years working with UNIX systems. I have yet to see > a machine run 4.2 better than the 780 does (soon to change with the > advent of the VAX 8600). Working for a competitor who *has* a machine that runs 4.2 better than the 780 does, unless you're beating the terminals to death (our terminal mux is, shall we say, sub-optimal), I'm a little biased here, but there do exist superminis out there that are faster than an 11/780. Are you willing to make that claim about the Power 6/32, *and* the Pyramid 90x, *and* the top-of-the-line Gould (maybe the MV/10000, too)? (While we're at it, how about the 11/785? If it isn't any improvement over the 11/780 running 4.2, *somebody* screwed up...) (Anybody put 4.2 up on some big IBM/Amdahl/... iron? For terminal I/O, I dunno, but I bet it's pretty good on CPU-intensive or disk-intensive jobs.) If you mean you've never seen any *micro* out there run 4.2 better than the 11/780, maybe. I agree that statements of the "wow, this supermicro is faster than a!" ilk are to be taken with a grain of salt - we had a supermicro in house whose manufacturer boasted that it was as fast as an 11/70. We decided, after working some with it, that it was no doubt true, under certain circumstances. If you dropped it off a building, it would fall as fast as an 11/70 (modulo air drag). Guy Harris {seismo,ihnp4,allegra}!rlgvax!guy