Need 286 "C" benchmark

[Keith Doyle]

>> int a[50000];
>> 
>> main()
>> {
>>   int i;
>>   for (i=0; i<50000; i++) a[i+1] = a[i];
>> }
>> 
>> Dave Trissel    {seismo,ihnp4}!ut-sally!oakhill!davet
>> Motorola Semiconductor Inc.  Austin, Texas
>
>Hmmm, once again Dave has submitted a benchmark that requires more than 64K
>of data.  This continued harping on the issue seems to indicate to me that
>maybe Dave realizes that for programs that require less than 64K of data
>that a 12MHz 286 actually keeps pace with the 16.67 MHz 68020.  Of course,
>he might not be saying this at all, and far be it for ME to try to read
>between his lines of code.....I would like to see the 680{00,10,20} 
>performance numbers and system configurations for these benchmarks, though,
>just for internal curiousity.
>-- 
>Ken Shoemaker, Intel, Santa Clara, Ca.
>

Well, Dave's approach is certainly no worse than the Intel ad which is 
presented without several important OHBYTHEWAY's.  Intel's assumtion that
all programs and data are <64k is no better than Motorola's assumtion
that they're all >64k.  Realizing that this is a basic difference in
performance between the two processors, I'd like to see benchmarks that
address programs and data of sizes both <64k and >64k.  (of course then
we can write benchmarks that use 12 registers to make the Motorola look
good, and ones that use 2 to make the Intel look good.)

Keith Doyle
#  {ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd