On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Martin Husemann wrote:

>On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 02:34:45PM +0100, Bernd Walter wrote:
>
>> [103]cicely21# ./blah 
>> 69.732u 0.129s 1:11.98 97.0%    0+0k 1+1io 0pf+0w
>
>My 100 MHz Krups needs 26 seconds.
>My 300 MHz ultra sparc needs 6.59 s.
>My 400 MHz PII 0.89 s.

I've had times ranging from 25 to 164 seconds on my single IPX. Is the
example flawed, given that I've had such ranging results on the same
machine?

>
>So gcc sucks (for sparcs at least), sparcs are dog slow, old Intels get 7.5 x
>the performance at the same clock frequency.

I don't know about that last assertion. I'd pitch my IPX against a 50 MHz 
i486 anyday:)

>
>Which of these is a suprise for you?
>
>Martin
>

-- 
"I've started referring to the proposed action against Iraq as Desert
Storm 1.1, since it reminds me of a Microsoft upgrade: it's expensive,
most people aren't sure they want it, and it probably won't work." 
-- Kevin G. Barkes

----------------------------------------------------------------------
    /"\ 
    \ /    ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN - AGAINST HTML MAIL 
     X                           - AGAINST MS ATTACHMENTS
    / \