Large Unix, SysV.4 for Sperry

[Doug Gwyn]

In article <0a=302Ns95IT01 at amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> littauer at amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (Tom Littauer) writes:
>In article <22847 at adm.BRL.MIL> archunix at stl-08sima.army.mil (Bernie J. Potter) writes:
>>Encore's Multimax 300's (4-40 mips) and 500's (17-170 mips).
>>Amdahl's 5890,5980, or 5990 machines, using UTS (5-100 mips).
>A word of caution here... as I'm sure you know, MIPS stands for
>Meaningles Indicator of Processor Speed.

That's for sure -- which is better, -153 mips or -95 mips?

The real reason for this note is to remark that most benchmarks
I've seen are also rather meaningless.  (Indeed, I suspect some
compiler vendors of tuning their compilers so that the "standard"
benchmarks used by the toy-computer magazines work well but any
reasonable application works horribly if at all.)  A really good
benchmark should simulate the anticipated application loading of
the system.  DA MINIS didn't do too badly in this area, actually.
BRL typically uses benchmarks based on ray-tracing code, since
that's one of our big application areas.