To: Elmer who wrote (149378 ) 11/25/2001 10:46:00 PM From: Dan3 Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 186894 Re: PPro performed worse than Pentium on old code. That old fantasy that you guys keep resurrecting about the Pentium. PPro had a glitch when it made 16 bit calls from 32 bit mode, but it was faster on most code in IPC and it scaled to higher MHZ, too. Another reminder that P4 is the only X86 core ever released in any company's line that failed to improve IPC. For example, on your favorite test (spec): Clock Chip (MHz) SPECint92 SPECfp92 SPECint95 SPECfp95 Pentium 133 149.3 116 3.9 3.28 Pentium Pro 200 320.2 283.2 6.75 8.09 It's the old spec because this test dates back from when the code was optimized for Pentium, not Pentium Procomputer-design.com Initially, the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation (SPEC -- Manassas, VA) benchmarks demonstrated RISC performance superiority over mainstream CISC processors. Now the SPEC benchmarks show that CISC, actually CISC ISAs with RISC implementation techniques, delivers RISC-level performance. For example, a 133-MHz Pentium from Dell Computer delivers 3.9 SPECint95 (3.9x the performance of a SPARC 10 baseline system) and 3.28 SPECfp95. In the older SPEC benchmarks, the numbers are 149.3 SPECint92 and 116 SPECfp92. Introduced last year, Pentium Pro -- Intel's version of fourth-generation, superscalar, four-issue RISCs -- delivers even higher performance. A 200-MHz Pentium Pro (Intel Alder system) benchmarks 6.75 SPECint95, 8.09 SPECfp95, 320.2 SPECint92, and 283.2 SPECfp92.In comparison, a Hewlett-Packard PA-RISC 7100 (120 MHz) delivers 4.41 SPECint95, 7.45 SPECfp95, 169.6 SPECint92, and 270.5 SPECfp92. DEC's Alpha RISC remains the RISC speed king, with an extremely high clock rate. You can get a DEC 21164 Alpha running at 291 MHz with 96 kbytes of on-chip, second-level cache. It clocks in at 7.03 SPECint95, 9.64 SPECfp95, 319.3 SPECint92, and 602.2 SPECfp92.