by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 30 Jun 2001 07:21:25 -0000
          by priv-edtnes04-hme0.telusplanet.net
          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.10 201-229-121-110) with ESMTP
          id <20010630072343.ZSPO9260.priv-edtnes04-hme0.telusplanet.net@argus.oxide.org>;
          Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:23:43 -0600
	by argus.oxide.org (8.11.4/8.10.1) id f5U7NhK10383;
	Sat, 30 Jun 2001 00:23:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Hugh Graham <hugh@openbsd.org>
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 00:23:43 -0700
To: Chuck McManis <cmcmanis@mcmanis.com>
Cc: port-vax@netbsd.org
Subject: Re: Relative performance?
Message-ID: <20010630002343.A11391@argus.oxide.org>
References: <5.0.0.25.2.20010630000516.023521a0@209.185.79.193>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20010630000516.023521a0@209.185.79.193>; from cmcmanis@mcmanis.com on Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 12:10:45AM -0700

One of these is our primary build machine. (Even back before we had
a working console, it was building releases over nfs...)

24 VUPs, to the 4k60's 12, and a really nice vax in general.

/Hugh

On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 12:10:45AM -0700, Chuck McManis wrote:
> Ok, so it is frustrating that DEC had such a great idea starting out with 
> VUPs but then in the later models they dropped VUPs in favor of TPS. It 
> wouldn't be too bad if they had back annotated their data sheets, however...
> 
> I finally scored a 4000/100A which is way cool because it straddles the 
> line between the desktop VAXen and the Q-bus ones. But I was trying to 
> figure out how fast it is and its either slower than the 4000/60 or its 
> faster than the 4000/500 :-)
> 
> Anyone know one way or the other?
> --Chuck
>