billyjoebob
IS-IT--Management
Asus A7V
T-bird (socket A) 750 (non-overclocked)
Running at pretty much standard BIOS settings (system mode set to Optimal)
PC133 128 MB RAM (CAS3 latency) (possibly low quality)
7200 RPM 20Gb ATA/66 HD
tests done on win95 and linux (gcc with all sane optimization options,
makes no great difference in speed, 5% at most)
PCV-E314DS 400 MHz Intel Pentium ® II processor (with 100 MHz FSB)
82440BX-100 AGP/PCI/ISA chipset
PCI Level 2.1, 33 MHz zero wait state
128 MB PC100 CAS3 ram
tests done on winme
Benchmarks written in ANSI C.
Benchmarks performed (all compiled with MSVC 6 standard release mode):
1) Random access to an 8-meg array -- t-bird about 40-50% faster.
Random numbers pre-generated (obviously) also in all future benchmarks.
2) Tight 'for' loop with pointer dereferencing. 80% faster on the t-bird.
(accessing small amount of ram)
3) 'for' loop with much pointer dereferencing (also accessing a small amount of ram)
also 80% faster.
4) Recursive call with elementary arithmetic (one increment)
to test CALL instruction -- 2x+ as fast on the T-bird
4) Applications run faster (no precise timing). Norton Utilities Benchmark gives 2x the
score for the athlon as for its concept of the typical 450 P][ (which doesn't say much,
since the test wasn't done on the P400)
All these results look about as expected. The following situation is messed up, however:
Shellsort (using alternating direction bubble h-sort) (if you don't know the algorithms,
ignore them and go on) on a singly linked list, sorting 1200000 elements takes
36 seconds on the P][, and 50 on the t-bird. Consistently. For lower list sizes this
difference also exists.
Can someone point to a possible specific cause(or causes) for this difference?
What can be done to fix it, or to test it? Has anyone else seen something like this?
If someone wants to test this on his/her machine, I could either post a binary (Win32 or ELF),
or, after some thought, e-mail the source (since this was a CS assignment, distributing
source might not be encouraged).
T-bird (socket A) 750 (non-overclocked)
Running at pretty much standard BIOS settings (system mode set to Optimal)
PC133 128 MB RAM (CAS3 latency) (possibly low quality)
7200 RPM 20Gb ATA/66 HD
tests done on win95 and linux (gcc with all sane optimization options,
makes no great difference in speed, 5% at most)
PCV-E314DS 400 MHz Intel Pentium ® II processor (with 100 MHz FSB)
82440BX-100 AGP/PCI/ISA chipset
PCI Level 2.1, 33 MHz zero wait state
128 MB PC100 CAS3 ram
tests done on winme
Benchmarks written in ANSI C.
Benchmarks performed (all compiled with MSVC 6 standard release mode):
1) Random access to an 8-meg array -- t-bird about 40-50% faster.
Random numbers pre-generated (obviously) also in all future benchmarks.
2) Tight 'for' loop with pointer dereferencing. 80% faster on the t-bird.
(accessing small amount of ram)
3) 'for' loop with much pointer dereferencing (also accessing a small amount of ram)
also 80% faster.
4) Recursive call with elementary arithmetic (one increment)
to test CALL instruction -- 2x+ as fast on the T-bird
4) Applications run faster (no precise timing). Norton Utilities Benchmark gives 2x the
score for the athlon as for its concept of the typical 450 P][ (which doesn't say much,
since the test wasn't done on the P400)
All these results look about as expected. The following situation is messed up, however:
Shellsort (using alternating direction bubble h-sort) (if you don't know the algorithms,
ignore them and go on) on a singly linked list, sorting 1200000 elements takes
36 seconds on the P][, and 50 on the t-bird. Consistently. For lower list sizes this
difference also exists.
Can someone point to a possible specific cause(or causes) for this difference?
What can be done to fix it, or to test it? Has anyone else seen something like this?
If someone wants to test this on his/her machine, I could either post a binary (Win32 or ELF),
or, after some thought, e-mail the source (since this was a CS assignment, distributing
source might not be encouraged).
