I recently ran Richard Spencers benchmarking app romark 1.01 on both my RPCEmu installations (0.8.8/5.17 and 0.8.9/4.02 respectively). Here are the results (0.8.8/5.17 first, % advantage of 0.8.8/5.17 last):
1. 572562; 592026; 97% 2. 9139; 9380; 97% 3. 3665; 3053; 120% 4. 11389; 6429; 177% 5. 4198; 3060; 137% 6. 4831; 3591; 135% 7. 99020; 21340; 464% 8. 74777; 25683; 291% 9. 3525; 2322; 152% 10. 3006; 1861; 162% [Key: 1. = Processor-looped instructions (cache); 2. = Memory-Multiple register transfer; 3. = Rectangle Copy Graphics acceleration test; 4. = Icon plotting 16 colour sprite with mask; 5. = Draw path Stroke narrow line; 6. = Draw fill Plot filled shape; 7. = HD Read Block load 1MB file; 8. = HD Write Block save 1MB file; 9. = FS Read Byte stream file in; 10. = FS Write Byte stream file out. The results above are averages of 3 iterations per OS version (in fact the variations were very small); the base system remains the same in both cases (3.4GHz Core i7 quad-core running W7 (64-bit)), and both RPCEmu versions use the Recompiler mode. The only other difference is RPCEmus memory allocation; 4.02 has 256MB, 5.17 has 128MB. Both versions display at 1680 × 1050 × 16M. Jeffrey Lee commented on the advantages under emulation of a 32-bit OS here: http://www.riscosopen.org/forum/forums/10/topics/961 Nevertheless, I find the degree of difference generally, and in particular, HD/FS Read/Writes and Icon plotting, surprising. George -- george greenfield _______________________________________________ Rpcemu mailing list [email protected] http://www.riscos.info/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rpcemu
