> > Of course it's rhetorical.  What's a "contemporary VAX"?  :-)
>
> That made me think...
> I would be interesting to see the speed of a full compile under SIMH/vax
> running on a top-of-the-line (speedwise  2.4Ghz?) Intel box
> Maybe that can be used to solve the cross-compile problems that have
> been discussed recently?

SIMH was slower on a 1.466 GHz AMD than my real VAX 4000/60; a 3 GHz AMD,
for instance, would still be much slower than a 4000/90. I thought about
this, too, and wondered about the idea of using an idle x86 to do some VAX
work, but the real hardware is still faster.

Maybe a G5 or some attempts at improving the efficiency of SIMH will
eventually make a VAX system faster than fast real VAX, but it will be a
while.

BTW - with NetBSD and other non-Intel compiler generated code, AMDs will
almost always be faster than Intels. Just my observation - not an
invitation for a flame war or anything. I'd be happy to substantiate it
with data off list, if anyone is curious.

John Klos
Sixgirls Computing Labs