Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!mcvax!botter!ast From: ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) Newsgroups: comp.os.minix Subject: Re: an interesting glitch + minix benchmarks (long) Message-ID: <1771@botter.cs.vu.nl> Date: 3 Dec 87 09:18:01 GMT References: <760@louie.udel.EDU> Reply-To: ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) Organization: VU Informatica, Amsterdam Lines: 33 In article <760@louie.udel.EDU> Leisner.Henr@xerox.com (Marty) writes: >I wrote the following benchmarks quickly to have a measure of system >performance: [benchmarks follow] Just for the fun of it, I ran the benchmarks too, on a Zenith Z-248 AT clone with 1 MB RAM disk and on a VAX 11-/750 running 4.1BSD. Here are my results and Marty's: Test that forked 1,000,000 times (with 1K stack): Marty Z-248 11/750 real 25.0 19.0 40.0 user 1.6 0.8 1.6 sys 18.4 15.2 36.0 Test that pushed 1 MB through a pipe: Marty Z-248 11/750 real 17.0 9.0 7.0 user 1.0 0.0 0.5 sys 14.0 1.9 5.6 This measure suggests that Marty's machine is pushing 59 kbytes/sec though the pipe (although he claims 80, so I may have misunderstood something). The Z-248 is getting 111 kbytes/sec, the 11/750 with 4.1BSD is getting 143 kbytes/sec, and Marty claims an 11/780 running 4.3BSD gets 120 kbytes/sec. Taken together, these measurements suggest that the raw compute power of a fast AT running MINIX, even using its much maligned C compiler, is at least in the same general league as a small VAX. Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl)