Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.misc:1152 comp.os.linux:55815
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.os.linux
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!brunix!cs.brown.edu!Mark_Weaver
From: Mark_Weaver@brown.edu
Subject: Re: FYI.. benchmarks on linux and 386bsd
In-Reply-To: jstern@aris.ss.uci.edu's message of 5 Oct 93 08:04:29 GMT
Message-ID: <MARK_WEAVER.93Oct5175919@excelsior.cis.brown.edu>
Sender: news@cs.brown.edu
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
References: <2CB12A8D.17397@news.service.uci.edu>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1993 21:59:19 GMT
Lines: 23
In article <2CB12A8D.17397@news.service.uci.edu> jstern@aris.ss.uci.edu (Jeff Stern) writes:
> These are two different dhrystone benchmarks, and a dhampstone
> benchmark which I compiled both under gcc (without optimization) on
> each system. To be fair, I can't remember which gcc I was running on
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> the 386bsd system, the one on linux is 2.4.5. The version of bsd I
> had was 0.1, of course, with a few patches. Linux here is SLS
> 0.99.12/1.03. My box is a 386-33 Micronics with 8MB ram and 64K
> cache, no wait states, and a co-processor (for what it's worth).
> Also, for what it's worth, each compile had different problems which I
> pragmatically hacked, having to do with conflicts with the libraries
> on previous declarations. i can explain each of these if anyone wanted
> to get into it..
You you were running gcc version 1 (the default that comes with
386bsd 0.1) then that explains it. gcc2 has a significantly better
optimizer that could easily explain this kind of speed difference.
Mark
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: Mark_Weaver@brown.edu | Brown University
PGP Key: finger mhw@cs.brown.edu | Dept of Computer Science