Date: Thu, 13 Feb 97 11:13:24 -0600 From: Ben Black <black@gage.com> To: Walter Hafner <hafner@suncog13.forwiss.tu-muenchen.de> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UltraSPARC and MicroSPARC vs Pentium Pro ? Message-ID: <9702131713.AA25713@squid.gage.com> In-Reply-To: <s9nk9ocr7po.fsf@suncog13.forwiss.tu-muenchen.de> References: <199702120330.TAA15056@f30.hotmail.com> <199702121833.KAA18506@freefall.freebsd.org> <s9nk9ocr7po.fsf@suncog13.forwiss.tu-muenchen.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>As you can see from the reference: > >- Overall performance is about the same as a Sparc 20 >- float is actually much faster on the Pentium as on the Sparc 20. > so a 133MHz P5 beats a 60MHz SuperSPARC? amazing. >Considering the price, the Pentium is of course the best you can get - >at least for image processing! (PC's have faster and better graphic >boards too, compared to typical workstations!) > yeah, those creator 3d boards with ALUs in the VRAM are just such junk. i'd much rather have a nice matrox board. gimme a break. >BTW: A P-Pro 200 has an overall benchmark of 3.0 ... faster than a Ultra >143 or Indigo 2! I can't give you exact results since our P-Pro is >currently in San Jose (SPIE conference exhibit). > a 200MHz P6 beats a 143MHz UltraSPARC? amazing. according to your benchmarks, the 167MHz UltraSPARC beats the 200MHz P6. how about numbers for a 200MHz Ultra? b3n
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9702131713.AA25713>