Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 11:14:15 +0200 From: Wilko Bulte <wkb@freebie.xs4all.nl> To: Thomas Pornin <pornin@bolet.org> Cc: alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Alpha CPU Performance vs i386 Message-ID: <20020515111415.B5904@freebie.xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <20020515093259.A50064@gnah.bolet.org>; from pornin@bolet.org on Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:33:00AM %2B0200 References: <20020514201923.GK37326@Area51.DK> <20020514222344.A2915@freebie.xs4all.nl> <20020515161627.O18023@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> <20020515093259.A50064@gnah.bolet.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:33:00AM +0200, Thomas Pornin wrote: > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 04:16:27PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote: ... > I have used as my main working machine a Miata for three years (under > Linux first, then FreeBSD) and I came to the following conclusions: > > -- The PC will performe better than the equally-clocked Alpha on > byte-intensive stuff, such as string handling, pattern matching and so. Have you tried Alpha's with and without BWX (byte manip. instructions)? I'm not sure if GCC uses them, I would expect yes for EV56 and higher. -- | / o / /_ _ wilko@FreeBSD.org |/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte Arnhem, the Netherlands To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020515111415.B5904>