At 08:25 �� 19/4/2002, you wrote:

>Phoebus Dokos wrote:
> > Is that possible?
>
>Hard to say, my database is not based in GCC compiled binaries, but
>once can take a rough factor of 1.3 to 1.33 between C68/GCC and
>according to that it should be 25000-25500 i/s for an Athlon 750
>(Thunderbird, that is).
>
>For some reason I don't have any QXL values in my database, but
>according to http://sol.spaceports.com/~vader/text/bench.htm it's
>
>QXL 20MHz
>Dhrystone  6578 Dhrystones/Sekunde
>Bogomips 9,58 Bogomips
>
>QXL2 25MHz
>Dhrystone 8620 Dhrystones/Sekunde
>Bogomips 13.42 Bogomips

It's @ 25 MHz


Also the Dhrystone figures (Me thinks) are with the previous version of 
Dhrystone.

This is the 2.1 one :-) (Thierry says IIRC that's it's 33% faster)

>This is a lot less from your figures, which by the way almost resemble
>the ones of a Q40 (36443) and that shouldn't really be the case. Mind
>you, don't do any tests in a Windows DOS box, the timer rate is all
>wrong there. Also on the QXL there quite some factors that can affect
>the speed pretty much, like the DISP_UPDATE rate (which should be set
>to IIRC 10,10 if you want a fair comparison).

I run it starting with DR-DOS 7.3, however I am going to run some extra 
tests and change the DISP_UPDATE too
I want to be accurate... however it did stun me.
The QSBB benchmark shows the difference in the I/O (visible with the naked 
eye too).
QPC of course beats the QXL (any QXL unless a PCI version materialises, 
-Knowing Dave that's not entirely impossible!-)
by leaps and bounds in disk access and graphics.

It would be extremely interesting to see a QPC version handling all the 
screen, disk I/O and assisting with the FPU and the 68040 doing the raw 
processing :-)Kinda like the QL emulator on the Atari :-)

>According to the figures on the page a K6-III 400 is comparable to the
>QXL. But generally one can say that the QXL has decent power but even
>a much slower QPC usually feels faster because of the better IO
>response.

I agree. Even with a Celeron 400 and only (!) 64Mb QPC does feel faster (is 
indeed though slower in real number crunching operations).
I am going to try and find a full blown 040 and also to push it up a tad to 
see what gives :-)) (Yeah I know! Speed freak!).

One thing I did not try though is to test with QSBB and QL colours option. 
Also it would be interesting to measure QPC 2 v.3... Off I am to download 
the demo :-)

Phoebus

>Marcel
>
>
>
>---
>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. �� ����������� ������ ����� 
>�������� ���.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.350 / Virus Database: 196 - Release Date: 17/4/2002

Reply via email to