Subject: Re: Alpha Multia - worth it?
To: Chris G. Demetriou <>
From: Curt Sampson <>
List: current-users
Date: 04/05/1997 22:53:56
On Thu, 3 Apr 1997, Chris G. Demetriou wrote:

> (2) It's slow.  see
> for a somewhat
> fair comparison of various CPUs.

The Multia is not slow due to CPU problems. My experiments with a
dhrystone benchmark show that at 233 MHz it is comparable to a P133
and at 266 MHz it is comparable to a P150. This would put the
integer CPU performance of a 166 MHz 21066 at the level of about
a P100 or thereabouts.

However, that doesn't explain why my 233 MHz Multia generally is
noticably slower than a P100. Running lmbench shows the problem:
the latency for memory access in both the L2 cache and main memory
is 2-4 times what you get from a decent Pentium system. This is a
big problem, made even bigger by the fact that the 166 MHz Multias
are woefully short on cache. You really want a megabyte or more of
cache on an Alpha system. The 233 MHz Multia has only 512K, and
the 166 MHz Multia has only 256K.


Curt Sampson		Info at
Internet Portal Services, Inc.		`And malt does more than Milton can
Vancouver, BC   (604) 257-9400		 To justify God's ways to man.'