[lkml]   [1997]   [May]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Alpha 500 vs Bi Ppro.
    On Thu, 15 May 1997, Yann DUPONT wrote:

    > Load :
    > We compiled bogomips (bogo-1.2), and launched 256 in the same time,
    > then launched xdvi & ghostscript, and compilations in the same time .
    > -> load jump over 100 on the 2 stations, but the system is still
    > responsive on the Bip & on the Alpha. With a load of 100 !!! I think
    > it's really good (there wasn't disk activities at this time)
    > compilations time are in the same range (the bip is still winner)
    > The bip also finish the huge bogomips test a little before the alpha.
    > When the load is at it's MAX, trying to refresh xdvi (with a
    > postscript in it) is quite fast & smooth on the ppro, much slower &
    > less smooth (that is, refresh is done little bit by little bit)
    > on the ALPHA...
    > Also tried the Unix Byte benchmark. The results are better on the
    > Alpha on most cases (2x to 10x !!!! improvement).
    > But in real use, This win seems not to be perceptible...

    You used X during some of the benchmark? I've heard that X is/was a
    bottleneck on alphas but I'm not sure if that's still the case...
    (ddt desided not to release an Alpha version of xquake last summer due this)
    Is X and/or xquake still slow with Alpha's? If so, why? ;)
    ( has xquake ...)

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:39    [W:0.019 / U:7.732 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site