On Thursday 08 February 2001  9:46 pm, Reinoud Zandijk wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > which takes
> >
> > Linux(x86/700MHz)		real 0.3  user 0.02 sys 0.27
> >
> > Solaris(ultra5/360MHz) 		real 3.1  user 0.3  sys 2.3
> >
> > Shark/NetBSD(SA110/233MHz)  	real 9.2  user 0.02 sys 1.9
>
> (NetBSD times reported by `time ./a.out')
>
> Sun SPARCClassic 50MHz      real    18.59  user 0.112 sys  3.641
> DEC Maxine 33MHz            real  1:13.92  user 0.262 sys 36.582
> Pentium 120/160 MHz (?)     real     3.21  user 0.022 sys  0.736
>
> RiscPC ARM7, 40 MHz         real    26.42  user 0.114 sys  6.743
>
> so compared to these figures it only really tests pmap performance, not
> really processor performance....  You can see that the MIPS pmap code
> isn't performing that well too ... wich could explain the slow compiling
> speed too. The processor speed in user mode is more about what to expect
> from 33MHz compared to 50MHz.

Yep, that sounds about right.  pmap performance is the major problem.  Hence 
I hoped for a speed increase by using kinetic ram.  In this test there isn't 
much I get:
22.91 real         0.06 user         5.76 sys
on the kinetic card.

Chris