[Simh] What is the best machine to run simh?
Carl Lowenstein
carl.lowenstein at gmail.com
Mon Jan 28 12:30:37 EST 2008
On Jan 25, 2008 12:01 AM, Zane H. Healy <healyzh at aracnet.com> wrote:
>
> Well just for fun... I VESTed it. Here is what
> I get from a Compaq XP1000 which has a 667Mhz
> 21264 CPU, 2GB RAM, and is running OpenVMS 8.3.
>
> Zane
>
> $ r PT_VAX_TV.EXE
> Emulated VAX CPU comparative performance test, version 1.0
> Copyright 2006 Software Resources International.
> This test is not suitable to measure overall system performance.
> No rights can be derived from the execution or the output of this test
> Adjusting test length for fixed and floating point to 10 seconds/unit
> Test started on Thu Jan 24 22:44:32 2008, for a COMPAQ Professional Workstation
> XP1000 CPU with VMS V8.3
>
> Sequential test results:
>
> MIPs Dhrystones VUPs
> Run 0 125.0 666666 1338.0
> Run 1 125.0 666666 1356.5
> Run 2 111.1 666666 1368.0
> Run 3 125.0 666666 1335.5
> ---------------------------------------------
> Average 121.5 666666 1349.5
>
> Interleaved test results:
>
> MIPs Dhrystones VUPs
> Run 0 111.1 666666 1354.5
> Run 1 125.0 666666 1364.0
> Run 2 125.0 666666 1366.0
> Run 3 125.0 666666 1346.5
> ---------------------------------------------
> Average 121.5 666666 1357.8
>
> Test ended on Thu Jan 24 23:03:00 2008, checksum 4AC23FB4
Don't you think maybe something is wrong in the test procedure when
every result in the Dhrystone column is 666666? I would look for some
kind of significance underflow. Like too short a run time to
accumulate enough timer ticks.
For that matter, every result in the MIPs column is either 1000/8 or 1000/9.
carl
--
carl lowenstein marine physical lab u.c. san diego
clowenstein at ucsd.edu
More information about the Simh
mailing list