The World of Computer Software/The World of Computer Software.iso/copro15a.zip/COPRO15.TXT

Text File | 1993-01-14 | 251KB | 4,531 lines

         EVERYTHING YOU ALWAYS WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT MATH COPROCESSORS

This document has been created to provide the net.community with some
detailed information about mathematical coprocessors for the Intel 80x86 CPU
family. It may also help to answer some of the FAQs (frequently asked
questions) about this topic. The primary focus of this document is on 80387-
compatible chips, but there is also some information on the other chips in
the 80x87 family and the Weitek family of coprocessors. Care was taken to
make the information included as accurate as possible. If you think you have
discovered erroneous information in this text, or think that a certain detail
needs to be clarified, or want to suggest additions, feel free to contact me
at:

         [e-mail]

         or at my SnailMail address:

         Norbert Juffa
         Wielandtstr. 14
         7500 Karlsruhe 1
         Germany


This is the fifth version of this document (dated 01-13-93) and I'd like
to thank those who have helped improving it by commenting on the previous
versions:

         Fred Dunlap (cyrix![e-mail]), Peter Forsberg
         ([e-mail]), Richard Krehbiel ([e-mail]), Arto
         Viitanen ([e-mail]), Jerry Whelan ([e-mail]),
         Eric Johnson ([e-mail]), Warren Ferguson
         ([e-mail]), Bengt Ask ([e-mail]), Thomas Hoberg
         ([e-mail]), Nhuan Doduc ([e-mail]), John
         Levine ([e-mail]), David Hough ([e-mail]),
         Duncan Murdoch ([e-mail]), Benjamin Eitan
         (benny.iil.intel.com)

A very special thanks goes to David Ruggiero ([e-mail]),
who did a great job editing and formatting this article. Thanks David!


Contents of this document
-------------------------

1)  What are math coprocessors?
2)  How PC programs use a math coprocessor
3)  Which applications benefit from a math coprocessor
4)  Potential performance gains with a math coprocessor
5)  How various math coprocessors work
6)  Coprocessor emulator software
7)  Installing a math coprocessor
8)  Detailed description and specifications for all available math
    coprocessor chips
9)  Finding out which coprocessor you have (the COMPTEST program)
10) Current coprocessor prices and purchasing advice
11) The coprocessor benchmark programs (performance comparisons of
    available math coprocessors using various CPUs)
12) Clock-cycle timings for each coprocessor instruction
13) Accuracy tests and IEEE-754 conformance for various coprocessors
14) Accuracy of transcendental function calculations for various coprocessors
15) Compatibility tests with Intel's 387DX / the SMDIAG program
16) References (literature)
17) Addresses of manufacturers of math coprocessors
18) Appendix A: Test programs for partial compatibility and accuracy checks
19) Appendix B: Benchmark programs TRNSFORM and PEAKFLOP



===========================
What are math coprocessors?
===========================

A coprocessor in the traditional sense is a processor, separate from the main
CPU, that extends the capabilities of a CPU in a transparent manner. This
means that from the program's (and programmer's) point of view, the CPU and
coprocessor together look like a single, unified machine.

The 80x87 family of math coprocessors (also known as MCPs [Math
CoProcessors], NDPs [Numerical Data Processors], NPXs [Numerical Processor
eXtensions], or FPUs [Floating-Point Units], or simply "math chips") are
typical examples of such coprocessors. The 80x86 CPUs, with the exception of
the 80486 (which has a built-in FPU) can only handle 8, 16, or 32 bit
integers as their basic data types. However, many PC-based applications
require the use of not only integers, but floating-point numbers. Simply put,
the use of floating-point numbers enables a binary representation of not only
integers, but also fractional values over a wide range. A common application
of floating-point numbers is in scientific applications, where very small
(e.g., Planck's constant) and very large numbers (e.g., speed of light) must
be accurately expressed. But floating-point numbers are also useful for
business applications such as computing interest, and in the geometric
calculations inherent in CAD/CAM processing.

Because the instruction sets of all 80x86 CPUs directly support only integers
and calculations upon integers, floating-point numbers and operations on them
must be programmed indirectly by using series of CPU integer instructions.
This means that computations when floating-point numbers are used are far
slower than normal, integer calculations. And this is where the 80x87
coprocessors come in: adding an 80x87 to an 80x86-based system augments the
CPU architecture with eight floating-point registers, five additional data
types and over 70 additional instructions, all designed to deal directly with
floating-point numbers as a basic data type. This removes the 'penalty' for
floating-point computations, and greatly increases overall system performance
for applications which depend heavily on these calculations.

In addition to being able to quickly execute load/store operations on
floating-point numbers, the 80x87 coprocessors can directly perform all the
basic arithmetic operation on them. Besides "knowing" how to add, subtract,
multiply and divide floating-point numbers, they can also operate on them to
perform comparisons, square roots, transcendental functions (such as logarithms
and sine/cosine/tangent), and compute their absolute value and remainder.

Like most things in life, floating-point arithmetic has been standardized.
The relevant standard (to which I will refer quite often in this document) is
the "IEEE-754 Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic" [10,11]. The
standard specifies numeric formats, value sets and how the basic arithmetic
(+,-,*,/,sqrt, remainder) has to work. All the coprocessors covered in this
document claim full or at least partial compliance with the IEEE-754
standard.



=================================================
How PC programs use 80x87 and Weitek coprocessors
=================================================

The basic data type used by all 80x87 coprocessors is an 80-bit long
floating-point number. This data type (called "temporary real" or "double
extended precision") can directly represent numbers which range in size
between 3.36*10^-4932 and 1.19*10^4932 (3.65*10^-4951 to 1.19*10^4932
including denormal numbers) where '^' denotes the power operator. (For those
familiar with floating-point formats, this format has 64 mantissa bits, 15
exponent bits and 1 sign bit, for the total of 80 bits.) This format provides
a precision of about 19 decimal places. 80x87s can also handle additional
data types that are converted to/from the internal format upon being loaded
or stored to/from the coprocessor. These include 16 bit, 32 bit, and 64 bit
integers as well as a 18 digit BCD (binary coded decimal) data type occupying
10 bytes and providing 18 decimal digits.

The 80x87 also supports two additional floating-point types. The short real
data type (also called "single-precision") has 32 bits that split into 23
mantissa bits, 8 exponent bit and a sign bit. By using the "hidden bit"
technique, the effective length of the mantissa is increased to 24 bits. (The
hidden bit technique exploits the fact that for normalized floating-point
numbers, the mantissa m always is in the range 1 <= m < 2. Since the first
mantissa bit represents the integer part of the mantissa, it is always set
for normalized numbers, and therefore need not be stored, as it is guaranteed
to always be 1.) The IEEE single-precision format provides a precision of
about 6-7 decimal places and can represent numbers between 1.17*10^-38 and
3.40*10^38 (1.40*10^-45 to 3.40*10^38 including denormal numbers). The long
real, or double-precision, data type has 64 bits, consisting of 52 mantissa
bits, 11 exponent bits, and the sign bit. It provides 15-16 decimal digits of
precision and can handle numbers from 2.22*10^-308 to 1.79*10^308 (4.94*10^-
324 to 1.79*10^308 including denormal numbers). (This format also uses the
hidden bit technique to provide effectively 53 mantissa bits.)

The eight registers in the 80x87 are organized in a stack-like manner which
takes some time getting used to if one programs the coprocessor directly in
assembly language. However, nowadays the compilers or interpreters for most
high level languages (HLLs) can give a programmer easy access to the
coprocessor's data types and use their instructions, so there is not much
need to deal directly with the rather unusual architecture of the 80x87.


The architecture of the Weitek chips differs significantly from the 80x87.
Strictly speaking, the Weitek Abacus 3167 and 4167 are not coprocessors in
that they do not transparently extend the CPU architecture; rather, they
could be described as highly-specialized, memory-mapped IO devices. But as
the term "coprocessor" has been traditionally used for these chips, they will
be referred to as such here.

The Weitek coprocessors have a RISC-like architecture which has been tuned
for maximum performance. Only a small instruction set has been implemented in
the chip, but each instruction executes at a very high speed (usually only a
few clock cycles each). Instructions available include load/store, add,
subtract, subtract reverse, multiply, multiply and negate, multiply and
accumulate, multiply and take absolute value, divide reverse, negate,
absolute value, compare/test, convert fix/float, and square root. In contrast
to the 80x87 family, the Weitek Abacus does not support a double extended
format, has no built-in transcendental functions, and does not support
denormals. The resources required to implement such features have instead
been devoted to implement the basic arithmetic operations as fast as
possible.

While the 80x87 coprocessors perform all internal calculations in double
extended precision and therefore have about the same performance for single
and double-precision calculations, the Weitek features explicit single and
double-precision operations. For applications that require only single-
precision operations, the Weitek can therefore provide very high performance,
as single-precision operations are about twice as fast as their double-
precision counterparts. Also, since the Weitek Abacus has more registers than
the 80x87 coprocessors (31 versus 8), values can be kept in registers more
often and have to be loaded from memory less frequently. This also leads to
performance gains.

The Weitek's register file consists of 31 32-bit registers, each one capable
of holding an IEEE single-precision number. Pairs of consecutive single-
precision registers can also be used as 64-bit IEEE double-precision
registers; thus there are 15 double-precision registers. The Weitek register
file has the standard organization like the register files in the 80386, not
the special stack-like organization of the 80x87 coprocessors.

To the main CPU, the Weitek Abacus appears as a 64 KB block of memory
starting at physical address 0C0000000h. Each address in this range
corresponds to a coprocessor instruction. Accessing a specified memory
location within this block with a MOV instruction causes the corresponding
Weitek instruction to be executed. (The instructions have been cleverly
assigned to memory locations in such a way that loads to consecutive
coprocessor registers can make use of the 386/486 MOVS string instruction.)
This memory-mapped interface is much faster than the IO-oriented protocol
that is used to couple the CPU to an 80287 or 80387 coprocessor. The Weitek's
memory block can actually be assigned to any logical address using the MMU
(memory management unit) in the 386/486's protected and virtual modes. This
also means that the Weitek Abacus *cannot* be used in the real mode of those
processors, since their physical starting address (0C0000000h) is not within
the 1 MByte address range and the MMU is inoperable in real mode. However,
DOS programs can make use of the Weitek by using a DOS extender or a memory
manager (such as QEMM or EMM386) that runs in protected/virtual mode itself
and can therefore map the Weitek's memory block to any desired location in
the 1 MByte address range.

Typically the FS segment register is then set up to point to the Weitek's
memory block. On the 80486, this technique has severe drawbacks, as using the
FS: prefix takes an additional clock cycle, thereby nearly halving the
performance of the 4167. Most DOS-based compilers exhibit this problem, so
the only way around it is to code in assembly language [75]. The Weitek
Abacus 3167 and 4167 are also supported by the UNIX operating system [33].



==========================================================
Which application programs benefit from a math coprocessor
==========================================================

According to the Intel 387DX User's Guide, there are more than 2100
commercial programs that can make use of a 387-compatible coprocessor. Every
program that uses floating-point arithmetic somewhere and contains the
instructions to support an 80x87 or Weitek chip can gain speed by installing
one. However, the speedup will vary from program to program (and even within
the same program) depending on how computation-intensive the program or
operation within the program is. Typical applications that benefit from the
use of a math coprocessor are:

   - CAD programs (AutoCAD, VersaCAD, GenericCAD)
   - Spreadsheet programs (Lotus 1-2-3, Excel, Quattro, Wingz)
   - Business graphics programs (Arts&Letters, Freedom of Press, Freelance)
   - Mathematical analysis and statistical programs (Mathematica, TKSolver,
       SPSS/PC, Statgraphics)
   - Database programs (dBase IV, FoxBase, Paradox, Revelation)

Note that for spreadsheets and databases, a coprocessor only helps if some
kind of floating-point computation is performed; this is true more often for
spreadsheets than for databases. Also note that the speed of many programs
depends quite heavily on factors such the speed of the graphics adapter (CAD)
or the disk performance (databases), so the computational performance is only
a (small) part of the total performance of the application. There are some
programs that won't run without a coprocessor, among them AutoCAD (R10 and
later) and Mathematica.

Most GUIs (graphical user interfaces) such as Microsoft Windows or the OS/2
Presentation Manager do *not* gain additional speed from using a
*mathematical* coprocessor, since their graphics operations only use integer
arithmetic [71]. They *will* benefit from a graphics board with a graphics
"coprocessor" that speeds up certain common graphics operations such as
BitBlt or line drawing. A few GUIs used on PCs, such as X-Windows, use a
certain amount of floating-point operations for operations such as arc
drawing. However, the use of floating-point operations in X-Windows seems to
have decreased significantly in versions after X11R3, so the overall
performance impact of a coprocessor is small [72]. Applications running under
any GUI may take advantage of a math coprocessor, of course (for example,
Microsoft Excel running under Windows).

While support for 80x87 coprocessors is very common in application programs,
the Weitek Abacus coprocessors do not enjoy such widespread support. Due to
their higher price, only a few high-end PCs have been equipped with Weitek
coprocessors. Some machines, such as IBM's PS/2 series, do not even have
sockets to accommodate them. Therefore, most of the programs that support
these coprocessors are also high-end products, like AutoCAD and Versacad-386.



==============================================
Potential performance gains with a coprocessor
==============================================

The Intel Math Coprocessor Utilities Disk that accompanies the Intel 387DX
coprocessor has a demonstration program that shows the speedup of certain
application programs when run with the Intel coprocessor versus a system with
no coprocessor:

         Application       Time w/o 387   Time w/387    Speedup

         Art&Letters          87.0 sec      34.8 sec     150%
         Quattro Pro           8.0 sec       4.0 sec     100%
         Wingz                17.9 sec       9.1 sec      97%
         Mathematica         420.2 sec     337.0 sec      25%


         The following table is an excerpt from [70]:

         Application        Time w/o 387   Time w/387  Speedup

         Corel Draw          471.0 sec     416.0 sec      13%
         Freedom Of Press    163.0 sec      77.0 sec     112%
         Lotus 1-2-3         257.0 sec      43.0 sec     597%


         The following table is an excerpt from [25]:

         Application        Time w/o 387   Time w/387  Speedup

         Design CAD, Test1    98.1 sec      50.0 sec      96%
         Design CAD, Test2    75.3 sec      35.0 sec     115%
         Excel, Test 1         9.2 sec       6.8 sec      35%
         Excel, Test 1        12.6 sec       9.3 sec      35%


Note that coprocessor performance also depends on the motherboard, or more
specifically, the chipset used on the motherboard. In [34] and [35]
identically configured motherboards using different 386 chipsets were tested.
Among other tests a coprocessor benchmark was run which is based on a fractal
computation and its execution time recorded. The following tables showing
coprocessor performance to vary with the chipset have been copied from these
articles in abridged form:

                  Cyrix                                   Cyrix
    chip set      387+                 chip set           83D87

    Opti, 40 MHz  24.57 sec   97.0%    PC-Chips, 33 MHz  26.97 sec   93.0%
    Elite,40 MHz  24.46 sec   97.4%    UMC,      33 MHz  27.69 sec   90.5%
    ACT,  40 MHz  23.84 sec  100.0%    Headland, 33 MHz  25.08 sec  100.0%
    Forex,40 MHz  23.84 sec  100.0%    Eteq,     33 MHz  27.38 sec   91.6%


This shows that performance of the same coprocessor can vary by up to ~10%
depending on the chipset used on your board, at least for 386 motherboards
(similar numbers for 286, 386SX, and 486 are, unfortunately, not available).
The benchmarks for this article were run on a motherboard with the Forex chip
set, one of the fastest 386 chip sets available, and not only with respect to
floating-point performance [35].



==================================
How various math coprocessors work
==================================

In any 80x86 system with an 80x87 math coprocessor, CPU instructions and
coprocessor instructions are executed concurrently. This means that the CPU
can execute CPU instructions while the coprocessor executes a coprocessor
instruction at the same time. The concurrency is restricted somewhat by the
fact that the CPU has to aid the coprocessor in certain operations. As the
CPU and the coprocessor are fed from the same instruction stream and both
instruction streams may operate on the same data, there has to be a
synchronizing mechanism between the CPU and the coprocessor.


The 8087
--------
In 8086/8088 systems with 8087 coprocessors, both chips look at every opcode
coming in from the bus. To do this, both chips have the same BIU (bus
interface unit) and the 8086 BIU sends the status signals of its prefetch
queue to the 8087 BIU. This insures that both processors always decode the
same instructions in parallel. Since all coprocessor instruction start with
the bit pattern 11011, it is easy for the 8087 to ignore all other
instructions. Likewise the CPU ignores all coprocessor instructions, unless
they access memory. In this case, the CPU computes the address of the LSB
(least significant byte) of the memory operand and does a dummy read. The
8087 then takes the data from the data bus. If more than one memory access is
needed to load an memory operand, the 8087 requests the bus from the CPU,
generates the consecutive addresses of the operand's bytes and fetches them
from the data bus. After completing the operation, the 8087 hands bus control
back to the CPU. Since 8087 and CPU are hooked up to the same synchronous
bus, they must run at the same speed. This means that with the 8087, only
synchronous operation of CPU and coprocessor is possible.

Another 8087 coprocessor instruction can only be started if the previous one
has been completed in the NEU (numerical execution unit) of the 8087. To
prevent the 8086 from decoding a new coprocessor instruction while the 8087
is still executing the previous coprocessor instruction, a coding mechanism
is employed:  All 8087-capable compilers and assemblers automatically
generate a WAIT instruction before each coprocessor instruction. The WAIT
instruction tests the CPU's /TEST pin and suspends execution until its input
becomes "LOW". In all 8086/8087 systems, the 8086 /TEST pin is connected to
the 8087 BUSY pin. As long as the NEU executes a coprocessor instruction, it
forces its BUSY pin "HIGH"; thus, the WAIT opcode preceding the coprocessor
instruction stops the CPU until any still-executing coprocessor instruction
has finished.

The same synchronization is used before the CPU accesses data that was
written by the coprocessor. A WAIT instruction after any coprocessor
instruction that writes to memory causes the CPU to stop until the
coprocessor has completed transfer of the data to memory, after which the CPU
can safely access it.


The 80287
---------
The 80287 coprocessor-CPU interface is totally different from the 8087
design. Since the 80286 implements memory protection via an MMU based on
segmentation, it would have been much too expensive to duplicate the whole
memory protection logic on the coprocessor, which an interface solution
similar to the 8087 would have required. Instead, in an 80286/80287 system,
the CPU fetches and stores all opcodes and operands for the coprocessor.
Information is then passed through the CPU ports F8h-FFh. (As these ports are
accessible under program control, care must be taken in user programs not to
accidentally perform write operations to them, as this could corrupt data in
the math coprocessor.)

The 8087/8087 combination can be characterized as a cooperation of partners
with equal rights, while the 80286/287 is more a master-slave relationship.
This makes synchronization easier, since the complete instruction and data
flow of the coprocessor goes through the CPU. Before executing most
coprocessor instructions, the 80286 tests its /BUSY pin, which is tied to the
287 coprocessor and signals if the 80287 is still executing a previous
coprocessor instruction or has encountered an exception. The 80286 then waits
until the /BUSY signal goes to "low" before loading the next coprocessor
instruction into the 80287. Therefore, a WAIT instruction before every
coprocessor instruction is not required. These WAITs are permissible, but not
necessary, in 80287 programs. The second form of WAIT synchronization (after
the coprocessor has written a memory operand) *is* still necessary on 286/287
systems.

The execution unit of the 80287 is practically identical to that of the 8087;
that is, nearly all coprocessor instructions execute in the same number of
clock cycles on both coprocessors. However, due to the additional overhead of
the 80287's CPU/coprocessor interface (at least ~40 clock cycles), an 8 MHz
80286/80287 combination can have lower floating-point performance than an
8086/8087 system running at the same speed. Additionally, older 286 boards
were often configured to run the coprocessor at only 2/3 the speed of the
CPU, making use of the ability of the 80287 to run asynchronously: The 80287
has a CKM pin that causes the incoming system clock to be divided by three
for the coprocessor if it is tied to ground. The 80286 always divides the
system clock by two internally, hence the final ratio of 2/3. However, when
the CKM (ClocK Mode) pin is tied high on the 80287, it does not divide the
CLK input. This feature has been exploited by the maker of coprocessor speed
sockets. These sockets tie CKM high and supply their own CLK signal with a
built-in oscillator, thereby allowing the 80287 or compatible to run at a
much higher speed than the CPU. With an IIT or Cyrix 287 one can have a 20
MHz coprocessor running with a 8 MHz 80286! Note, however, that the floating-
point performance of such a configuration does not scale linearly with the
coprocessor clock, since all the data has to be passed through the much
slower CPU. If the coprocessor executes mostly simple instructions (such as
addition and multiplication), doubling the coprocessor clock to 20 MHz in a
10 MHz system does not show any performance increase at all [24].

The Intel 80287XL, the Cyrix 82S87, and the IIT 2C87 contain the internals of
a 387 coprocessor, but are pin-compatible to the original 287. These chips
divide the system clock by two internally, as opposed to three in the
original 80287. Since the 80286 also divides the system clock by two, they
usually run synchronously with respect to the CPU, although they can also be
run asynchronously.


The 80387
---------
The coprocessor interface in 80386/80387 systems is very similar to the one
found in 286/287 systems. However, to prevent corruption of the coprocessor's
contents by programming errors, the IO ports 800000F8h-800000FFh are used,
which are not accessible to programs. The CPU/coprocessor interface has been
optimized and uses full 32-bit transfers; the interface overhead has been
reduced to about 14-20 clock cycles. For some operations on the 387 'clones'
that take less than about 16 clock cycles to complete, this overhead
effectively limits the execution rate of coprocessor instructions. The only
sensible solution to provide even higher floating-point performance was to
integrate the CPU and coprocessor functionality onto the same chip, which
is exactly what Intel did with the 80486 CPU. The FPU in the 486 also benefits
from the instruction pipelining and from the on-chip cache.



=====================
Coprocessor emulators
=====================

In the absence of a coprocessor, floating-point calculations are often
performed by a software package that simulates its operations. Such a program
is called a coprocessor emulator. Simulating the coprocessor has the
advantage for application programs that identical code can be generated for
use with either the coprocessor and the emulator, so that it's possible to
write programs that run on any system without regard to whether a coprocessor
is present or not. Whether the program will use an actual coprocessor or
software emulating it can easily be determined at run-time by detecting the
presence or absence of the coprocessor chip.

Two approaches to interface an 80x87 emulator to programs are common. The
first method makes use of the fact that all coprocessor instruction start
with the same five bit pattern 11011. Thus the first byte of a coprocessor
instruction will be in the range D8-DF hexadecimal. In addition, coprocessor
instructions usually are preceded by a WAIT instruction (opcode 9Bh) which is
one byte long (the reason for doing this has been described in the previous
chapter dealing with the operating details of the 80x87). One common approach
is to replace the WAIT instruction and the first byte of the coprocessor
instruction with one out of eight interrupt instructions; the remaining bytes
of the coprocessor instruction are left unchanged. Interrupts 34 to 3B
hexadecimal are used for this emulation technique. (Note that the sequences
9B D8 ... 9B DF can be easily converted to the interrupt instructions CD 34
... CD 3B by simple addition and subtraction of constants.) The compiler or
assembler initially produces code that contains these appropriate interrupt
calls instead of the coprocessor instructions. If a hardware coprocessor is
detected at run-time, the emulator interrupts point to a short routine that
converts the interrupts calls back to coprocessor instructions (yes, this
is known as "self-modifying code"). If no coprocessor is found the interrupts
point to the emulation package, which examines the byte(s) following the
interrupt instruction to determine which floating-point operation to perform.
This method is used by many compilers, including those from Microsoft and
Borland. It works with every 80x86 CPU from the 8086/8088 on.

The second method to interface an emulator is only available on 286/386/486
machines. If the emulation bit in the machine status word of these processors
is set, the processors will generate an interrupt 7 whenever a coprocessor
instruction is encountered. The vector for this interrupt will have been set
up to point at an emulation package that decodes the instruction and performs
the desired operation. This approach has the advantage that the emulator
doesn't have to be included in the program code, but can be loaded once (as a
TSR or device driver) and then used by every program that requires a
coprocessor. Emulation via interrupt 7 is transparent, which means that
programs containing coprocessor instructions execute just like a coprocessor
was present, only slower. This approach is taken by the public domain EM87
emulator, the shareware program Q387, and the commercial Franke387 emulator,
for example. Even programs that require a coprocessor to run like AutoCAD
are 'fooled' to believe that a coprocessor is present with emulators using
INT 7.

Operating systems such as OS/2 2.0 and Windows 3.1 provide coprocessor
emulations using INT 7 automatically if they do not find a coprocessor to be
installed. The emulator in Windows doesn't seem to be very fast, as people
who have ported their Turbo Pascal programs from the TP 6.0 DOS compiler
(using the emulation built into the TP 6.0 run-time library) to the TPW 1.5
Windows compiler (using MS Windows' emulator) have noticed. Slowdowns of as
much as a factor of five have been reported [79].

The size of the emulator used by TP 6.0 is about 9.5 KB, while EM87 occupies
about 15.8 KB as a TSR, and Franke387 uses about 13.4 KB as a device driver.
Note that Franke387 and especially EM87 model a real coprocessor much more
closely than Turbo Pascal's emulator does. In particular, EM87 supports
denormal numbers, precision control, and rounding control. The emulator in TP
6.0 does not implement these features. The version of Franke387 tested (V2.4)
supports denormals in single and double-precision, but not double extended
precision, and it supports precision control, but not rounding control.
The recently introduced shareware program Q387 only runs on 386, 386SX, 486SX
and compatible processors. The program loads completely into extended memory
and uses about 330 KB. To enable INT 7 trapping to a service routine in
extended memory it needs to run with a memory manager (e.g. EMM386, QEMM,
or 386MAX). The huge size of the program stems from the fact that it was
solely optimized for speed, assuming that extended memory is a cheap resource.
Presumably it uses large tables to speed computations. Intel's E80287 program
is supposed to be an 100% exact emulation of the 80287 coprocessor [44]. Note
that the more closely a real coprocessor is modelled by the emulator, the
slower the emulator runs and the larger the code for the emulator gets.


         Relative execution times of coprocessor vs. software emulators
         for selected coprocessor instructions

                        Intel 387DX    TP 6.0 Emulator   EM87 Emulator

         FADD ST, ST(0)       1              26                104
         FDIV [DWord]         1              22                136
         FXAM                 1              10                 73
         FYL2X                1              33                102
         FPATAN               1              36                110
         F2XM1                1              38                110



         The following table is an excerpt from [44]:

                        Intel 80287  Intel E80287 Emulator

         FADD ST, ST(0)       1              42
         FDIV [DWord]         1             266
         FXAM                 1             139
         FYL2X                1              99
         FPATAN               1             153
         F2XM1                1              41



         The following has been adapted from [43] and merged with my own
         data:

                        Intel 8087  TP 6.0 Emul. (8086)  Intel Emul. (8086)

         FADD ST, ST(0)       1              20                 94
         FDIV [DWord]         1              22                 82
         FPTAN                1              18                144
         F2XM1                1               6                171
         FSQRT                1              44                544



One of the reasons emulators are so slow is that they are often designed to
run with every CPU from the 8086/8088 on upwards. This is the case with the
emulators built into the compiler libraries of the Turbo Pascal 6.0 (also
used by Turbo C/C++) and Microsoft C 6.0 compiler (probably also used in
other Microsoft products) and is also true for the EM87 emulator in the
public domain. By using code that can run on a 8086/8088, these emulators
forego the speed advantage offered by the additional instructions and
architectural enhancements (such as 32-bit registers) of the more advanced
Intel 80x86 processors. A notable exception to this is the Franke387
emulator, a commercial emulator that is also sold as shareware. It uses 386-
specific 32-bit code and only runs on 386/386SX/486SX computers.

Besides being slow, coprocessor emulators have other drawbacks when compared
with real coprocessors. Most of the emulators do not support the additional
instructions that the 387-compatible coprocessors offer over the 80287.
Often, some of the low-level stack-manipulating instructions like FDECSTP are
not emulated. For example, [76] lists the coprocessor instructions not
emulated by Microsoft's emulator (included in the MS-C and MS-FORTRAN
libraries) as follows:

         FCOS         FRSTOR      FSINCOS      FXTRACT
         FDECSTP      FSAVE       FUCOM
         FINCSTP      FSETPM      FUCOMP
         FPREM1       FSIN        FUCOMPP

Additionally, some parts of the coprocessor architecture, like the status
register, are often not or only partially emulated. Some emulators do not
conform to the IEEE-754 standard in their implementation of the basic
arithmetic functions, while the hardware coprocessors do. Also, they
sometimes lack the support for denormals (a special class of floating-point
numbers) although it is required by the standard. Not all the 80x87 emulators
support rounding control and precision control, also features required by
IEEE-754. Most of these omissions are aimed at making the emulator faster and
smaller. Because of the performance gap and these other shortcomings of
coprocessor emulators, a real coprocessor is a must for anybody planning to
do some serious computations. (At today's prices, this shouldn't pose much of
a problem to anybody!)

Nhuan Doduc ([e-mail]) has tested a number of standalone
coprocessor emulators for PCs, among them the two emulators, EM87 and
Franke387 V2.4, already mentioned. He found Franke387 to be the best in terms
of reliability, speed, and accuracy.



=============================
Installing a math coprocessor
=============================

Usually, installing a coprocessor doesn't pose much of a problem, as every
coprocessor comes with installation instructions and a diagnostic disk that
lets you check its correct operation after installation. In addition, the
user manuals of most computers have a section on coprocessor installation.

1)   Make sure to buy the right coprocessor for your system. An 8087 works
     together with 8086, 8088, V20, and V30 CPUs. An 80287, 287XL or
     compatible works with a 80286 CPU. (There are also some old 386
     motherboards that accept a 80287 coprocessor, but they usually also
     provide a socket for the 387; given today's pricing, it makes no sense
     not to get a 387 for these systems.) A 80387, 387DX or compatible
     coprocessor is for 386-based systems, as is the Intel RapidCAD. 387
     coprocessors also work with the Cyrix 486DLC CPU (which, despite its
     name, does not include an FPU). Similarly, the 387SX or compatible
     coprocessor go into systems whose CPU is a 386SX or Cyrix 486SLC.

     The Weitek Abacus 3167 works with a 386 CPU but requires a 121-pin EMC
     socket in the system; this is *not* the same socket used by a 80387 or
     compatible chip, and some computers, such as IBM's PS/2s, don't have
     this socket. The Weitek Abacus 4167 works together with the 486 and
     requires a special 142-pin socket to be present.

2)   Always install a coprocessor that's rated at the same clock speed as the
     CPU. For example, in a 40 MHz 386 system using an AMD Am386-40, install
     a coprocessor rated for 40 MHz such as a Cyrix 83D87-40, C&T 38700DX-40,
     IIT 3C87-40, or ULSI 83C87-40. Running a coprocessor above its specified
     frequency rating may cause it to produce false results, which you might
     fail to recognize as such. (I have personally experienced this problem
     with a Cyrix 83D87-33 that I tried to push to 40 MHz. It passed all the
     diagnostic benchmarks on the Cyrix diagnostic disk and the tests of some
     commercial system test programs. However, I found it to fail the
     Whetstone and Linpack benchmarks, which include accuracy checks.)
     Although there is usually no problem with overheating when pushing a
     coprocessor over the specified maximum frequency rating, be warned that
     operation of a coprocessor above the maximum ratings stated by the
     manufacturer may make its operation unreliable.

     Some 386 boards allow the coprocessor to be clocked differently than the
     CPU. This is called "asynchronous operation" and allows you, for
     example, to run the coprocessor at 33 MHz while the CPU runs at 40 MHz.
     Of the currently available math coprocessors, only the Intel 80387 and
     387DX support asynchronous operation. The 387-compatible "clones" from
     Cyrix, C&T, IIT and ULSI always run at the full speed of the CPU, even
     if you have set up your motherboard for asynchronous operation.

3)   Once you've got the correct coprocessor for your system you can start
     the actual installation process. Turn off the computer's power switch
     and unplug the power cord from the wall outlet, remove the case, and
     locate the math coprocessor socket. This socket is always located right
     next to the main CPU, which can be identified by the printing on top of
     the chip. (It's also usually one of the biggest chips on the board). The
     8078 and 80287 DIL sockets are rectangular sockets with 20 pin holes on
     each of the longer sides. The 387SX PLCC socket is a square socket that
     has 17 vertical connector strips on the 'wall' of each side. The 387 PGA
     socket is square and has two rows of pin holes on each side. The EMC
     socket for the Weitek 3167 is similar but has three rows of holes on
     each side. The PGA socket for the Weitek 4167 is also square with three
     rows of holes on each side. If you can't find the math coprocessor
     socket, consult your owner's manual, your computer dealer, or a
     knowledgeable friend.

     If you are installing the Intel RapidCAD chipset in a 386 system, you
     will have to remove the 386 CPU first. Intel provides an easy-to-use
     chip extractor and a storage box for the 386 chip for this purpose. Just
     follow the instructions in the RapidCAD installation manual.

     On many systems, the motherboard is supported only at a small number of
     points. Since considerable force is required to insert a pin grid chip
     like the 80387, RapidCAD, or Weitek Abacus 3167 into its socket, the
     board may bend quite a lot due to the insertion pressure. This could
     cause cracks in the board's conductive traces that may render it
     intermittently or completely inoperable. Damage done to the board in
     this way is usually not covered by the computer's warranty! Therefore,
     it may be a good idea to first check how much the board bends by
     pressing on the math coprocessor socket with your finger. If you find it
     to bend easily, try to put something under the board directly beneath
     the coprocessor socket. If this is impossible, as it is in many desktop
     cases, consider removing the whole mother board from the case, and
     placing it on a hard, flat surface free of static electricity. (You will
     also have to do this if your system's CPU and coprocessor socket are on
     a separate card rather than on the motherboard, as is typical in many
     modular systems.)

     Be sure you are properly grounded before you remove the coprocessor from
     its antistatic box, as even a tiny jolt of static electricity can ruin
     the coprocessor. Make sure you do not touch the pins on the bottom of
     the chip.

     Check the pins and make sure none are bent; if some are, you can
     *carefully* straighten them with needle-nose pliers or tweezers.

4)   Match the coprocessor's orientation with the orientation of the socket.
     Correct orientation of the coprocessor is absolutely essential, because
     if you insert it the wrong way it may be damaged.

     8087 and 287 coprocessors have a notch on one the shorter sides of their
     rectangular DIL package that should be matched with the notch of the
     coprocessor socket. Usually the 286 CPU and the 287 coprocessor are
     placed alongside each other and both have the same orientation, (that
     is, their respective notches point in the same direction). 387SX
     coprocessors feature a white dot or similar mark that matches with some
     sort of marking on the socket. 387 coprocessors have a bevelled corner
     that is also marked with a white dot or similar marking. This should be
     matched with the bevelled or otherwise marked corner of the socket. If
     your system has only a large EMC socket and you are installing a 387 in
     it, you will leave one row of pin holes free on each side of the chip.

     Once you have found the correct orientation, place the chip over the
     socket and make sure all pins are correctly aligned with their
     respective holes. Press firmly and evenly on the chip -- you may have to
     press hard to seat the coprocessor all the way. Again, make sure your
     motherboard does not bend more than slightly under the insertion
     pressure. For 8087, 287, and 387 coprocessors it is normal that the
     coprocessor does not go all the way in; about one millimeter (1/25 inch)
     of space is usually left between the socket and the bottom of the
     coprocessor chip. (This allows the insertion of a extraction device
     should it become necessary to remove the chip. Note that the
     construction of the 387SX's PLCC socket makes it next-to-impossible to
     remove the coprocessor once fully inserted, as the top of the chip is
     level with the socket's 'walls'.)

5)   Check your computer's manual for the proper position of any jumpers or
     switches that need to be set to tell the system it now has a coprocessor
     (and possibly, which kind it has). Put the cover back on the system
     unit, reconnect the power, and turn on your computer. Depending on your
     system's BIOS, you may now have to run a setup or configuration program
     to enable the coprocessor. Finally, run the programs supplied on the
     diagnostic disk (included with your coprocessor) to check for its
     correct operation.



=================================================================
Descriptions of available coprocessors, CPU+FPU (as of 01-11-93):
=================================================================

Intel 8087

     [43] This was the first coprocessor that Intel made available for the
     80x86 family. It was introduced in 1980 and therefore does not have full
     compatibility with the IEEE-754 standard for floating-point arithmetic,
     (which was finally released in 1985). It complements the 8088 and 8086
     CPUs and can also be interfaced to the 80188 and 80186 processors.

     The 8087 is implemented using NMOS. It comes in a 40-pin CERDIP (ceramic
     dual inline package). It is available in 5 MHz, 8 MHz (8087-2), and 10
     MHz (8087-1) versions. Power consumption is rated at max. 2400 mW [42].

     A neat trick to enhance the processing power of the 8087 for
     computations that use only the basic arithmetic operations (+,-,*,/) and
     do not require high precision is to set the precision control to single-
     precision. This gives one a performance increase of up to 20%. For
     details about programming the precision control, see program PCtrl in
     appendix A.

     With the help of an additional chip, the 8087 can in theory be
     interfaced to an 80186 CPU [36]. The 80186 was used in some PCs (e.g.
     from Philips, Siemens) in the 1982/1983 time frame, but with IBM's
     introduction of the 80286-based AT in 1984, it soon lost all
     significance for the PC market.


Intel 80187

     The 80187 is a rather new coprocessor designed to support the 80C186
     embedded controller (a CMOS version of the 80186 CPU; see above). It was
     introduced in 1989 and implements the complete 80387 instruction set. It
     is available in a 40 pin CERDIP (ceramic dual inline package) and a 44
     pin PLCC (plastic leaded chip carrier) for 12.5 and 16 MHz operation.
     Power consumption is rated at max. 675 mW for the 12.5 MHz version and
     max. 780 mW for the 16 MHz version [37].


Intel 80287

     [44] This is the original Intel coprocessor for the 80286, introduced in
     1983. It uses the same internal execution unit as the 8087 and therefore
     has the same speed (actually, it is sometimes slower due to additional
     overhead in CPU-coprocessor communication). As with the 8087, it does
     not provide full compatibility with the IEEE-754 floating point standard
     released in 1985.

     The 80287 was manufactured in NMOS technology, and is packaged in a 40-
     pin CERDIP (ceramic dual inline package). There are 6 MHz, 8 MHz, and 10
     MHz versions. Power consumption can be estimated to be the same as that
     for the 8087, which is 2400 mW max.

     The 80287 has been replaced in the Intel 80x87 family with its faster
     successor, the CMOS-based Intel 287XL, which was introduced in 1990 (see
     below). There may still be a few of the old 80287 chips on the market,
     however.


Intel 80287XL

     This chip is Intel's second-generation 287, first introduced in 1990.
     Since it is based on the 80387 coprocessor core, it features full IEEE
     754 compatibility and faster instruction execution. Intel claims about
     50% faster operation than the 80287 for typical benchmark tests such as
     Whetstone [45]. Comparison with benchmark results for the AMD 80C287,
     which is identical to the Intel 80287, support this claim [1]: The Intel
     287XL performed 66% faster than the AMD 80C287 on a fractal benchmark
     and 66% faster on the Whetstone benchmark in these tests. Whetstone
     results from [46] show the Intel 287XL at 12.5 MHz to perform 552
     kWhets/sec as opposed to the AMD's 80C287 289 kWhets/sec, a 91%
     performance increase. A benchmark using the MathPak program showed the
     Intel 287XL to be 59% faster than the Intel 80287 (6.9 sec. vs. 11.0
     sec.) [26]. Since the 287XL has all the additional instructions and
     enhancements of a 387, most software automatically identifies it as an
     80387-compatible coprocessor and therefore can make use of extra 387-
     only features, such as the FSIN and FCOS instructions.

     The 287XL is manufactured in CMOS and therefore uses much less power
     than the older NMOS-based 80287. At 12.5 MHz, the power consumption is
     rated at max. 675 mW, about 1/4 of the 80287 power consumption. The
     287XL is available in either a 40-pin CERDIP (ceramic dual inline
     package) or a 44 pin PLCC (plastic leaded chip carrier). (This latter
     version is called the 287XLT and intended mainly for laptop use.) The
     287XL is rated for speeds of up to 12.5 MHz.


AMD 80C287

     This chip, manufactured by Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), is an exact
     clone of the old Intel 80287, and was first brought to market by AMD in
     1989. It contains the original microcode of the 80287 and is therefore
     100% compatible with it. However, as the name indicates, the 80C287 is
     manufactured in CMOS and therefore uses less power than an equivalent
     Intel 80287. At 12.5 MHz, its power consumption is rated at max. 625 mW
     or slightly less than that of the Intel 80287XL [27]. There is also
     another version called AMD 80EC287 that uses an 'intelligent' power save
     feature to reduce the power consumption below 80C287 levels. Tests at
     10.7 MHz show typical power consumption for the 80EC287 to be at 30 mW,
     compared to 150 mW for the AMD 80C287, 300 mW for the Intel 287XL and
     1500 mW for the Intel 80287 [57]. The 80EC287 is therefore ideally
     suited for low power laptop systems.

     The AMD 80C287 is available in speeds of 10, 12, and 16 MHz. (I have
     only seen it being offered in 10 MHz and 12 MHz versions, however.) At
     about US$ 50, it is currently the cheapest coprocessor available. Note
     that it provides less performance than the newer Intel 287XL (see
     above). The AMD 80C287 is available in 40 pin ceramic and plastic DIPs
     (dual inline package) and as 44 pin PLCC (plastic leaded chip carrier).

     Due to recent legal battles with Intel over the right to use the 287
     microcode, which AMD lost, AMD may have to discontinue this product
     (disclaimer: I am not a legal expert).


Cyrix 82S87

     This 80287-compatible chip was developed from the Cyrix 83D87, (Cyrix's
     80387 'clone') and has been available since 1991. It complies completely
     with the IEEE-754 standard for floating-point arithmetic and features
     nearly total compatibility with Intel's coprocessors, including
     implementation of the full Intel 80387 instruction set. It implements
     the transcendental functions with the same degree of accuracy and the
     superior speed of the Cyrix 83D87. This makes the Cyrix 82S87 the
     fastest [1] and most accurate 287 compatible coprocessor available.
     Documentation by Cyrix [46] rates the 82S87 at 730 kWhets/sec for a 12.5
     MHz system, while the Intel 287XL performs only 552 kWhets/sec. 82S87
     chips manufactured after 1991 use the internals of the Cyrix 387+, which
     succeeds the original 83D87 [73].

     The 82S87 is a fully static CMOS design with very low power requirements
     that can run at speeds of 6 to 20 MHz. Cyrix documentation shows the
     82S87 to consume about the same amount of power as the AMD 80C287 (see
     above). The 82S87 comes in a 40 pin DIP or a 44 pin PLCC (plastic leaded
     chip carrier) compatible with the pinout of the Intel 287XLT and
     ideally suited for laptop use.


IIT 2C87

     This chip was the first 80287 clone available, introduced to the market
     in 1989. It has about the same speed as the Intel 287XL [1]. The 2C87
     implements the full 80387 instruction set [38]. Tests I ran on the 3C87
     seem to indicate that it is not fully compatible with the IEEE-754
     standard for floating-point arithmetic (see below for details), so it
     can be assumed that the 2C87 also fails these test (as it presumably
     uses the same core as the 3C87).

     The IIT 2C87 provides extra functions not available on any other 287
     chip [38]. It has 24 user-accessible floating-point registers organized
     into three register banks. Additional instructions (FSBP0, FSBP1, FSBP2)
     allow switching from one bank to another. (Transfers between registers
     in different banks are not supported, however, so this feature by itself
     is of limited usefulness. Also, there seems to be only one status
     register (containing the stack top pointer), so it has to be manually
     loaded and stored when switching between banks with a different number
     of registers in use [40]). The register bank's main purpose is to aid
     the fourth additional instruction the 2C87 has (F4X4), which does a full
     multiply of a 4x4 matrix by a 4x1 vector, an operation common in 3D-
     graphics applications [39]. The built-in matrix multiply speeds this
     operation up by a factor of 6 to 8 when compared to a programmed
     solution according to the manufacturer [38]. Tests show the speed-up to
     be indeed in this range [40]. For the 3C87, I measured the execution
     time of F4X4 to be about 280 clock cycles; the execution time on the
     2C87 should be somewhat larger - I estimate it to be around 310 clock
     cycles due to the higher CPU-NDP communication overhead in instruction
     execution in 286/287 systems (~45-50 clock cycles) compared with 386/387
     systems (~16-20 clock cycles). As desirable as the F4X4 instruction may
     seem, however, there are very few applications that make use of it when
     an IIT coprocessor is detected at run time (among them Schroff
     Development's Silver Screen and Evolution Computing's Fast-CAD 3-D
     [25]).

     The 2C87 is available for speeds of up to 20 MHz. It is implemented in
     an advanced CMOS process and has therefore a low power consumption of
     typically about 500 mW [38].


Intel 80387

     This chip was the first generation of coprocessors designed specifically
     for the Intel 80386 CPU. It was introduced in 1986, about one year after
     the 80386 was brought to market. Early 386 system were therefore
     equipped with both a 80287 and a 80387 socket. The 80386 does work with
     an 80287, but the numerical performance is hardly adequate for such a
     system.

     The 80387 has itself since been superseded by the Intel 387DX introduced
     by a quiet change in 1989 (see below). You might find it when acquiring
     an older 386 machine, though. The old 80387 is about 20% slower than the
     newer 387DX.

     The 80387 is packaged in a 68-pin ceramic PGA, and was manufactured
     using Intel's older 1.5 micron CHMOS III technology, giving it moderate
     power requirements. Power consumption at 16 MHz is max. 1250 mW (750 mW
     typical), at 20 MHz max. 1550 mW (950 mW typical), and at 25 MHz max.
     1950 mW (1250 mW typical) [60].


Intel 387DX

     The 387DX is the second-generation Intel 387; it was quietly introduced
     to replace the original 80387 in 1989. This version is done in a more
     advanced CMOS process which enables the coprocessor to run at a maximum
     frequency of 33 MHz (the 80387 was limited to a maximum frequency of 25
     MHz). The 387DX is also about 20% faster than the 80387 on the average
     for the same clock frequency. For a 386/387 system operating at 29 MHz
     the Whetstone benchmark (compiled with the highly optimizing Metaware
     High-C V1.6) runs at 2377 kWhetstones/sec for the 80387 and at 2693
     kWhetstones/sec for the 387DX, a 13% increase. In a fractal calculation
     programmed in assembly language, the 387DX performance was 28% higher
     than the performance of the 80387. The transcendental functions have
     also sped up from the 80387 to the 387DX. In the Savage benchmark
     (again, compiled with Metaware High-C V1.6 and running on a 29 MHz
     system), the 80387 evaluated 77600 function calls/second, while the
     387DX evaluated 97800 function calls/second, a 26% increase [7]. Some
     instructions have been sped up a lot more than the average 20%. For
     example, the performance of the FBSTP instruction has increased by a
     factor of 3.64.

     The Intel 387DX (and its predecessor 80387) are the only 387
     coprocessors that support asynchronous operation of CPU and coprocessor.
     The 387 consists of a bus interface unit and a numerical execution unit.
     The bus interface unit always runs at the speed of the CPU clock
     (CPUCLK2). If the CKM (ClocK Mode) pin of the 387 is strapped to Vcc,
     the numerical execution unit runs at the same speed as the bus interface
     unit. If CKM is tied to ground, the numerical execution unit runs at the
     speed provided by the NUMCLK2 input. The ratio of NUMCLK2 (coprocessor
     clock) to CPUCLK2 (CPU clock) must lie within the range 10:16 to 14:10.
     For example, for a 20 MHz 386, the Intel 387DX could be clocked from
     12.5 MHz to 28 MHz via the NUMCLK2 input. (On the Cyrix 83D87, Cyrix
     387+, ULSI 83C87, and the IIT 387, the CKM pin is not connected. These
     coprocessors are therefore not capable of asynchronous operation and
     always run at the speed of the CPU.)

     The Intel 387DX is manufactured using Intel's advanced low power CHMOS
     IV technology. Power consumption at 20 MHz is max. 900 mW (525 mW
     typical), at 25 MHz max. 1050 mW (625 mW typical), and at 33 MHz max.
     1250 mW (750 mW typical) [59].


Intel 387SX

     This is the coprocessor paired with the Intel 386SX CPU. The 386SX is an
     Intel 80386 with a 16-bit, rather than 32-bit, data path. This reduces
     (somewhat) the costs to build a 386SX system as compared to a full 32-
     bit design required by a 386DX. (The 386SX's main *marketing* purpose
     was to replace the 80286 CPU, which was being sold more cheaply by other
     manufacturers [such as AMD], and which Intel subsequently stopped
     producing.) Due to the 16-bit data path, the 386SX is slower than the
     386DX and offers about the same speed as an 80286 at the same clock
     frequency for 16-bit applications. But as the 386SX is a complete 80386
     internally, it offers also the possibility to run 32-bit applications
     and supports the virtual 8086 mode (used for example by Windows' 386
     enhanced mode).

     The 387SX has all the features of the Intel 80387, including the ability
     of asynchronous operation of CPU and coprocessor (see Intel 387DX
     information, above). Due to the 16 bit data path between the CPU and the
     coprocessor, the 387SX is a bit slower than a 80387 operating at the
     same frequency. In addition, the 387SX is based on the core of the
     original 80387, which executes instructions slower than the second
     generation 387DX.

     The 387SX comes in a 68-pin PLCC (plastic leaded chip carrier) package
     and is available in 16 MHz and 20 MHz versions. (Coprocessors for faster
     386SX systems based on the Am386SX CPU are available from IIT, Cyrix,
     and ULSI.) Power consumption for the 387SX at 16 MHz is max. 1250 mW
     (740 mW typical); for the 20 MHz version it is max. 1500 mW (1000 mW
     typical) [62].


Intel 387SL

     This coprocessor is designed for use in systems that contain an Intel
     386SL as the CPU. The 386SL is directly derived from the 386SX. It is a
     static CHMOS IV design with very low power requirements that is intended
     to be used in notebook and laptop computers. It features an integrated
     cache controller, a programmable memory controller, and hardware support
     for expanded memory according to the LIM EMS 4.0 standard. The 387SL,
     introduced in early 1992, has been designed to accompany the 386SL in
     machines with low power consumption and substitute the 387SX for this
     purpose. It features advanced power saving mechanisms. It is based on
     the 387DX core, rather than on the older and slower 80387 core (which is
     used by the 387SX).


IIT 3C87

     This IIT chip was introduced in 1989, about the same time as the Cyrix
     83D87. Both coprocessors are faster than Intel's 387DX coprocessor. The
     IIT 3C87 also provides extra functions not available on any other 387
     chip [38]. It has 24 user-accessible floating-point registers organized
     into three register banks. Three additional instructions (FSBP0, FSBP1,
     FSBP2) allow switching from one bank to another. (Transfers between
     registers in different banks are not supported, however, so this feature
     by itself is of limited usefulness. Also, there seems to be only one
     status register [containing the stack top pointer], so it has to be
     manually loaded and stored when switching between banks with a different
     number of registers in use [40]). The register bank's main purpose is to
     aid the fourth additional instruction the 3C87 has (F4X4), which does a
     full multiply of a 4x4 matrix by a 4x1 vector, an operation common in
     3D-graphics applications [39]. The built-in matrix multiply speeds this
     operation up by a factor of 6 to 8 when compared to a programmed
     solution according to the manufacturer [38]. Tests show the speed-up to
     be indeed in this range [40]. I measured the F4X4 to execute in about
     280 clock cycles, during which time it executes 16 multiplications and
     12 additions. The built-in matrix multiply speeds up the matrix-by-
     vector multiply by a factor of 3 compared with a programmed solution
     according to IIT [39]. The results for my own TRNSFORM benchmark support
     this claim (see results below), showing a performance increase by a
     factor of about 2.5. This makes matrix multiplies on the IIT 3C87 nearly
     as fast as on an Intel 486 at the same clock frequency. As desirable as
     the F4X4 instruction may seem, however, there are very few applications
     that make use of it when an IIT coprocessor is detected at run time
     (among them Schroff Development's Silver Screen and Evolution
     Computing's Fast-CAD 3-D [25]).

     These IIT-specific instructions also work correctly when using a Chips &
     Technologies 38600DX or a Cyrix 486DLC CPU, which are both marketed as
     faster replacements for the Intel 386DX CPU.

     Tests I ran with the IEEETEST program show that the 3C87 is not fully
     compatible with the IEEE-754 standard for floating-point arithmetic,
     although the manufacturer claims otherwise. It is indeed possible that
     the reported errors are due to personal interpretations of the standard
     by the program's author that have been incorporated into IEEETEST and
     that the standard also supports the different interpretation chosen by
     IIT. On the other hand, the IEEE test vectors incorporated into IEEETEST
     have become somewhat of an industry standard [66] and Intel's 387, 486,
     and RapidCAD chips pass the test without a single failure, so the fact
     that the IIT 3C87 fails some of the tests indicates that it is not fully
     compatible with the Intel 387 coprocessor. My tests also show that the
     IIT 3C87 does not support denormals for the double extended format. It
     is not entirely clear whether the IEEE standard mandates support for
     extended precision denormals, as the IEEE-754 document explicitly only
     mentions single and double-precision denormals. Missing support for
     denormals is not a critical issue for most applications, but there are
     some programs for which support of denormals is at the very least quite
     helpful [41]. In any case, failure of the 3C87 to support extended
     precision denormal numbers does represent an incompatibility with the
     Intel 387 and 486 chips.

     The 3C87 is implemented in an advanced CMOS process and has low power
     requirements, typically about 600 mW. Like the 387 'clones' from Cyrix
     and ULSI, the 3C87 does not support asynchronous operation of the CPU
     and the coprocessor, but always runs at the full speed of the CPU. It is
     available in 16, 20, 25, 33, and 40 MHz versions.


IIT 3C87SX

     This is the version of the IIT 3C87 that is intended for use with
     Intel's 386SX or AMD's Am386SX CPU, and is functionally equivalent to
     the IIT3C87. Due to the 16-bit data path between the CPU and the
     coprocessor in a 386SX- based system, coprocessor instructions will
     execute somewhat more slowly than on the 3C87. At present, the IIT
     3C87SX is the only 387SX coprocessor that is offered at speeds of 16,
     20, 25, and 33 MHz. (I have read that Cyrix has also announced an 83S87-
     33, but haven't seen it being offered yet.) The 3C87SX is packaged in a
     68-pin PLCC.


Cyrix FasMath 83D87

     This chip was introduced in 1989, only shortly after the coprocessors
     from IIT. It has been found to be the fastest 387-compatible coprocessor
     in several benchmark comparisons [1,7,68,69]. It also came out as the
     fastest coprocessor in my own tests (see benchmark results below).
     Although the Cyrix 83D87 provides up to 50% more performance than the
     Intel 387DX in benchmarks comparisons, the speed advantage over other
     387-compatible coprocessors in real applications is usually much
     smaller, because coprocessor instructions represent only a small part of
     the total application code. For example, in a test using the program 3D-
     Studio, the Cyrix 83D87 was 6% faster than the Intel 387DX [1].

     Besides being the fastest 387 coprocessor, the 83D87 also offers the
     most accurate transcendental functions results of all coprocessors
     tested (see test results below). The new "387+" version of the 83D87,
     available since November 1991, even surpasses the level of accuracy of
     the original 83D87 design. Note that the name 387+ is used in European
     distribution only. In other parts of the world, the new chip still goes
     by the name 83D87.

     Unlike Intel's coprocessors, which use the CORDIC [18,19] algorithm to
     compute the transcendental functions, Cyrix uses polynomial and rational
     approximations to the functions. In the past the CORDIC method has been
     popular since it requires only shifts and adds, which made it relatively
     easy to implement a reasonably fast algorithm. Recently, the cost for the
     implementation of fast floating-point hardware multipliers has dropped
     significantly (due to the availability of VLSI), making the use of
     polynomial and rational approximations superior to CORDIC for the
     generation of transcendental functions [61]. The Cyrix 83D87 uses a fast
     array multiplier, making its transcendental functions faster than those
     of any other 387 compatible coprocessor. It also uses 75 bit for the
     mantissa in intermediate calculations (as opposed to 68 bits on other
     coprocessors), making its transcendental functions more accurate than
     those of any other coprocessor or FPU (see results below).

     The 83D87 (and its successor, the 387+) are the 387 'clones' with the
     highest degree of compatibility to the Intel 387DX. A few minor software
     and hardware incompatibilities have been documented by Cyrix [12]. The
     software differences are caused by some bugs present in the 387DX that
     Cyrix fixed in the 83D87. Unlike the Intel 387DX, the 83D87 (and all
     other 387-compatible chips as well) does not support asynchronous
     operation of CPU and coprocessor. There were also problems in the past
     with the CPU-coprocessor communications, causing the 83D87 to
     occasionally hang on some machines. The reason behind this was that
     Cyrix shaved off a wait state in the communication protocol, which
     caused a communications breakdown between the CPU and the 83D87 for some
     systems running at 25 MHz or faster. (One notable example of this
     behavior was the Intel 302 board.) Also there were problems with boards
     based on early revisions of the OPTI chipset. These problem are only
     rarely encountered with the current generation of 386 motherboards, and
     it is possible that it has been entirely eliminated in the 387+, the
     successor to the 83D87.

     To reduce power consumption the 83D87 features advanced power saving
     features. Those portions of the coprocessor that are not needed are
     automatically shut down. If no coprocessor instructions are being
     executed, *all* parts except the bus interface unit are shut down [12].
     Maximal power consumption of the Cyrix 83D87 at 33 MHz is 1900 mW, while
     typical power consumption at this clock frequency is 500 mW [15].


Cyrix EMC87

     This coprocessor is basically a special version of the Cyrix 83D87,
     introduced in 1990. In addition to the normal 387 operating mode, in
     which coprocessor-CPU communication is handled through reserved IO
     ports, it also offers a memory-mapped mode of operation similar to the
     operation principle of the Weitek Abacus. Like the Weitek chip, the
     EMC87 occupies a block of memory starting at physical address C0000000h
     (the Abacus occupies a memory block of 64 KB, while the EMC87 uses only
     4 KB [77]). It can therefore only be accessed in the protected or
     virtual modes of the 386 CPU. DOS programs can access the EMC87 with the
     help of DOS extenders or memory managers like EMM386 which run in
     protected/virtual mode themselves. To implement the memory-mapped
     interface, the usual 80x87 architecture has been slightly expanded with
     three additional registers and eleven additional instructions that can
     only be used if the memory-mapped mode is enabled.

     Using this special mode of the EMC87 provides a significant speed
     advantage. The traditional 387 CPU-coprocessor interface via IO ports
     has an overhead of about 14-20 clock cycles. Since the Cyrix 83D87
     executes some operations like addition and multiplication in much less
     time, its performance is actually limited by the CPU-coprocessor
     interface. Since the memory-mapped mode has much less overhead, it
     allows all coprocessor instructions to be executed at full speed with no
     penalty.

     Originally, Cyrix claimed support for the fast memory-mapped mode of the
     EMC87 from a number of software vendors (including Borland and
     Microsoft). However, there are only very few applications that make use
     of it, among them Evolution Computing's FastCAD 3D, MicroWay Inc.'s NDP
     FORTRAN-386 compiler, Metaware's High-C compiler version 1.6 and newer,
     and Intusofts's Spice [63,73]. Part of the problem in supporting the
     memory-mapped mode is that the application must reserve one of the
     general purpose registers of the CPU to use memory-mapped mode
     instructions that access memory.

     (Note that the EMC87 is *not* compatible with Weitek's Abacus
     coprocessor. They both use the same CPU interface technique [memory
     mapping], but while the EMC87 uses the standard 387 instruction set, the
     Weitek Abacus coprocessors use a different instruction set entirely its
     own.)

     Since the EMC87 provides also the standard 386/387 CPU interface via IO
     ports, it can be used just like any other 387-compatible coprocessor and
     delivers the same performance as the Cyrix 83D87 in this mode. The EMC87
     even allows mixed use of memory-mapped and traditional instructions in
     the same code. Cyrix has also implemented some additional instructions
     in the EMC87 that are also available in the 387-compatible mode:
     FRICHOP, FRINT2, and FRINEAR. These instructions enable rounding to
     integer without setting the rounding mode by manipulating the
     coprocessor control word, and are intended to make life easier for
     compiler writers.

     In a test, the EMC87 at 33 MHz ran the single-precision Whetstone
     benchmark at 7608 kWhetstones/sec, while the Cyrix 83D87 at 33 MHz had a
     speed of only 5049 kWhetstones/sec, an increase of 50.6% [63]. In
     another test, the EMC87 ran a fractal computation at twice the speed of
     the Cyrix 83D87 and 2.6 times as fast as an Intel 387DX [64]. A third
     test found the EMC87's overall performance to be 20% higher than the
     performance of the Cyrix 83D87 [65].

     The Cyrix FasMath EMC87 has also been marketed as Cyrix AutoMATH; the
     two chips are identical. Unlike the Cyrix 83D87, which fits into the 68-
     pin 387 coprocessor socket, the EMC87 comes in a 121-pin PGA and
     requires the 121-pin EMC (Extended Math Coprocessor) socket. Note that
     not all boards have such a socket (a notable exception being IBM's
     PS/2s, for example). The EMC87 is available 25 and 33 MHz versions.
     Maximum power consumption at 33 MHz is 2000 mW.

     Cyrix appears currently to be phasing out the EMC87.


Cyrix FasMath 387+

     This chip is the second-generation successor to the Cyrix 83D87. (The
     name "387+" is only used for European distribution; in other parts of
     the world, it goes by the original 83D87 designation.) According to a
     source within Cyrix [73], the 387+ was designed to make a smaller (and
     thus cheaper to manufacture) coprocessor chip that could also be pushed
     to higher frequencies than the original chip: the 387+ is available in
     versions of up to 40 MHz, whereas the original 83D87 could go no faster
     than 33 MHz.

     The Cyrix 387+ is ideally suited to be used with Cyrix's 486DLC CPU,
     which is a 486SX compatible replacement chips for the Intel 386DX.
     Indeed Cyrix sells upgrade kits consisting of a 486DLC CPU and a
     Cyrix 387+.

     In my tests, I found the Cyrix 387+ to be about five to 10 percent
     *slower* than the Cyrix 83D87. However, some instructions like the
     square root (FSQRT) now run at only half the speed at which they ran in
     the 83D87, and most transcendental functions show about a 40% drop in
     performance compared to their 83D87 averages (see performance results,
     below). However, I did find the transcendental functions on the 387+ to
     be a bit *more* accurate than those implemented in the 83D87. The new
     design uses a slower hardware multiplier that needs six clock cycles to
     multiply the floating-point mantissa of an internal precision number,
     while the multiplier in the 83D87 takes only 4 clocks to accomplish the
     same task. Since the transcendental functions in Cyrix math coprocessors
     are generated by polynomial and rational approximations, this slows them
     down significantly.

     The divide/square root logic has also been changed from the 83D87
     design. The original design used an algorithm that could generate both
     the quotient and square root, so the execution times for these
     instructions were nearly identical. The algorithm chosen for the
     division in the 387+ doesn't allow the square root to be taken so
     easily, so it takes nearly twice as long.

     In the 387+, the available argument range for the FYL2XP1 instruction
     has been extended, from the usual range -1+sqrt(2)/2..sqrt(2)/2 that is
     found on all 80x87 coprocessors, to include all floating-point numbers.
     Also, four additional instructions have been implemented: FRICHOP
     (opcode DD FC), FRINT2 (opcode DB FC), FRINEAR (opcode DF FC), and FTSTP
     (opcode D9 E6).


Cyrix FasMath 83S87

     The 83S87 is the SX version of the Cyrix 83D87. Just as the 83D87 is the
     fastest 387-compatible coprocessor, the Cyrix 83S87 is the fastest of
     the 387SX compatible coprocessors [1], as well as providing the most
     accurate transcendental functions. 83S87 chips manufactured after 1991
     use the internals of the Cyrix 387+, the successor to the original 83D87
     [73] (above). The Cyrix 83S87 is ideally suited to be used with the
     Cyrix Cx486SLC CPU, a 486SX compatible CPU which is a replacement chip
     for the Intel 386SX CPU.

     The 83S87 is packaged in a 68-pin PLCC and is available in 16, 20, and
     25 MHz versions. Due to the advanced power saving features of the Cyrix
     coprocessor, the typical power consumption of the 20 MHz version is only
     about 350 mW [67].


ULSI Math*Co 83C87

     The ULSI 83C87 is an 80387-compatible coprocessor first introduced in
     early 1991, well after the IIT 3C87 and Cyrix 83D87 appeared. Like other
     387 clones, it is somewhat faster than the Intel 387DX, particularly in
     its basic arithmetic functions. The transcendental functions, however,
     show only a slight speed improvement over the Intel 387DX (see benchmark
     results below).

     In my tests, the ULSI had the most inaccurate transcendental functions
     of all tested coprocessors. However, the maximum relative error is still
     within the limits set by Intel, so this is probably not an important
     issue for all but a very few applications. The ULSI 83C87 shows some
     minor flaws in the tests for IEEE 754 compatibility, but this, too, is
     probably unimportant under typical operating conditions. ULSI claims
     that the program IEEETEST, which was used to test for IEEE
     compatibility, contains many personal interpretations of the IEEE
     standard by the program's author and states that there is no ANSI-
     certified IEEE-754 compliance test. While this may be true, it is
     also a fact that the IEEE test vectors used in IEEETEST are a de facto
     industry standard, and that Intel's 387, 486, and RapidCAD chips pass it
     without a single failure, as do the coprocessors from Cyrix. Since the
     ULSI Math*Co 83C87 fails some of the tests, it is certainly less than
     100% compatible with Intel's chips, although this will likely make
     little or no difference in typical operating conditions. (It is
     interesting to note that an ULSI 83S87 manufactured in 92/17 showed
     fewer errors in the IEEETEST test run [74] than the ULSI 83C87,
     manufactured in 91/48, I used in my original test. This indicates that
     ULSI might have applied some quick fixes to newer revisions of their
     math coprocessors.)

     The ULSI 83C87 fails to be compatible with the IEEE-754 in that is does
     not implement the "precision control" feature. While all the internal
     operations of 80x87 coprocessors are usually performed with the maximum
     precision available (double-extended precision with 64 mantissa bits),
     the 80x87 architecture also offer the possibility to force lower
     precision to be used for the basic arithmetic functions (add, subtract,
     multiply, divide, and square root). This feature is required by IEEE-754
     for all coprocessors that can not store results *directly* to a single
     or double-precision location. Since 80x87 coprocessors lack this storage
     capability, they all implement precision control to provide correctly
     rounded single- and double-precision results according to the floating-
     point standard - except the ULSI chips. For programs that make use of
     precision control (e.g., Interactive UNIX), correct implementation of
     the feature may be essential for correct arithmetic results.

     Like other non-Intel 387 compatibles, the 83C87 does not support
     asynchronous operation of the CPU and the coprocessor. This means that
     the 83C87 always runs at the full speed of the CPU. It is available in
     20, 25, 33, and 40 MHz versions. The ULSI is produced in low power CMOS;
     power consumption at 20 MHz is max. 800 mW (400 mW typical), at 25 MHz
     it is max. 1000 mW (500 mW typical), at 33 MHz it is max. 1250 mW (625
     mW), and at 40 MHz it is max. 1500 mW (750 mW typical) [58]. The 83C87
     is packaged in a 68-pin ceramic PGA.

     ULSI coprocessors come with a lifetime warranty. ULSI Systems, Inc.,
     will replace the coprocessor up to three times free of charge should it
     ever fail to function properly.


ULSI Math*Co 83S87

     This chip is the SX version of the ULSI 83C87, for use in systems with
     an Intel 387SX or an AMD Am387SX CPU. It is functionally equivalent to
     the 83C87. To aid low-power laptop designs, the ULSI 83S87 features an
     advanced power saving design with a sleep mode and a standby mode with
     only minimal power requirements. Power consumption under normal
     operating conditions (dynamic mode) is max. 400 mW at 16 MHz (300 mW
     typical), max. 450 mW at 20 MHz (350 mW typical), and max. 500 mW at 25
     MHz (400 mW typical) [58]. The ULSI 83S87 is packaged in a 68-pin PLCC.


C&T SuperMATH 38700DX

     Produced by Chips&Technologies, this is the latest entry into the 387-
     compatible marketplace. Originally announced in October, 1991, it has
     apparently not been available to end-users before the third quarter of
     1992, at least here in Germany. My tests show that its compatibility
     with Intel products is very good, even for the more arcane features of
     the 387DX and comparable to the coprocessors from Cyrix. Like these
     chips, it passes the IEEETEST program without a single failure. It
     passes, of course, all tests in Chips&Technologies' own compatibility
     test program, SMDIAG. However, some of the tests (the transcendental
     functions) in this program are selected in such a way that the C&T 38700
     passes while the Cyrix 83D87 or Intel RapidCAD fail, so they are not
     very useful. (There is also a 'bug' in the test for FSCALE that hides a
     true bug in the C&T 38700.) My tests show the accuracy of the
     transcendental functions on the C&T 38700DX varies. Overall, accuracy of
     the transcendentals is slightly better than on the Intel 387DX.

     In my own speed tests [see below] and those reported in [1], the C&T
     38700DX showed performance at about 90-100% the level of the Cyrix
     83D87, which is the 387 clone with the highest performance. For
     floating-point-intensive benchmarks, the C&T 38700DX provides up to 50%
     more computational performance than the Intel 387DX. However, as with
     all other 387 compatible coprocessors, the speed advantage over the
     Intel 387DX is far less significant in real applications.

     The SuperMATH 38700DX is implemented in 1.2 micron CMOS with on-chip
     power management, which makes for low power consumption. The 38700DX is
     packaged in a 68-pin ceramic PGA (pin grid array and available in speeds
     of 16, 20, 25, 33, and 40 MHz.


C&T 38700SX

     This chip is the SX version of the 38700DX and compatible with the Intel
     387SX. It provides performance comparable to a Cyrix 83S87 [1], the
     387SX clone with the highest performance. Compatibility with the Intel
     387SX is very good and on par with the high degree of the compatibility
     found in the Cyrix 83S87.

     The 38700SX has low power consumption. It is packaged in a 68-pin PLCC
     (plastic leaded chip carrier) and available in speeds of 16, 20, and 25
     MHz.


Intel RapidCAD

     The RapidCAD is not a coprocessor, strictly seen, although it is
     marketed as one. Rather, it is a full replacement for a 80386 CPU:
     basically, an Intel 486DX CPU chip without the internal cache and with a
     standard 386 pinout. RapidCAD is delivered as a set of two chips.
     RapidCAD-1 goes into the 386 socket and contains the CPU and FPU.
     RapidCAD-2 goes into the coprocessor (387) socket and contains a simple
     PAL whose only purpose is to generate the FERR signal normally generated
     by a coprocessor (This is needed by the motherboard circuitry to provide
     287 compatible coprocessor exception handling in 386/387 systems.) The
     RapidCAD instruction set is compatible with the 386, so it doesn't have
     any newer, 486-specific instructions like BSWAP. However, since the
     RapidCAD CPU core is very similar to 80486 CPU core, most of the
     register-to-register instructions execute in the same number of clock
     cycles as on the 486.

     RapidCAD's use of the standard 386 bus interface causes instructions
     that access memory to execute at about the same speed as on the 386. The
     integer performance on the RapidCAD is definitely limited by the low
     memory bandwidth provided by this interface (2 clock cycles per bus
     cycle) and the lack of an internal cache. CPU instructions often execute
     faster than they can be fetched from memory, even with a big and fast
     external cache. Therefore, the integer performance of the RapidCAD
     exceeds that of a 386 by *at most* 35%. This value was derived by
     running some programs that use mostly register-to-register operations
     and few memory accesses, and is supported by the SPEC ratings that Intel
     reports for the 386-33 and the RapidCAD-33: while the 386-33 has a
     SPECint of 6.4, the RapidCAD has a SPECint of 7.3 [28], a 14% increase.
     (Note that these tests used the old [1989] SPEC benchmarks suite.)

     While CPU and integer instructions often execute in one clock cycle on
     the RapidCAD, floating-point operations always take more than seven
     clock cycles. They are therefore rarely slowed down by the low-bandwidth
     386 bus interface; My tests show a 70%-100% performance increase for
     floating-point intensive benchmarks over a 386-based system using the
     Intel 387DX math coprocessor. This is consistent with the SPECfp rating
     reported by Intel. The 386/387 at 33 MHz is rated at 3.3 SPECfp, while
     the RapidCAD is rated at 6.1 SPECfp at the same frequency, an 85%
     increase. This means that a system that uses the RapidCAD is faster than
     *any* 386/387 combination, regardless of the type of 387 used, whether
     an Intel 387DX or a faster 387 clone. The diagnostic disk for the
     RapidCAD also gives some application performance data for the RapidCAD
     compared to the Intel 387DX:

             Application      Time w/ 387DX  Time w/ RapidCAD  Speedup

             AutoCAD 11              52 sec         32 sec       63%
             AutoShade/Renderman    180 sec        108 sec       67%
             Mathematica(Windows  ) 139 sec        103 sec       35%
             SPSS/PC+ 4.01           17 sec         14 sec       21%

     RapidCAD is available in 25 MHz and 33 MHz versions. It is distributed
     through different channels than the other Intel math coprocessors, and I
     have therefore been unable to obtain a data sheet for it. [78] gives the
     typical power consumption of the 33 MHz RapidCAD as 3500 mW, which is
     the same as for the 33 MHz 486DX. The RapidCAD-1 chip gets quite hot
     when operating. Therefore, I recommend extra cooling for it (see the
     paragraph below on the 486 for details). The RapidCAD-1 is packaged in a
     132-pin PGA, just like the 80386, and the RapidCAD-2 is packaged in a
     68-pin PGA like a 80387 coprocessor.


Intel 486DX

     The Intel 486DX is, of course, not solely a coprocessor. This chip,
     first introduced by Intel in 1989, functionally combines the CPU (a
     heavily-pipelined implementation of the 386 architecture) with an
     enhanced 387 (the chip's floating-point unit, FPU) and 8 KB of unified
     on-chip code/data cache. (This description is necessarily simplified;
     for a detailed hardware description, see [52].) The 486DX offers about
     two to three times the integer performance of a 386 at the same clock
     frequency, while floating-point performance is about three to four times
     as high as the Intel 387DX at the same clock rate [29]. Since the FPU is
     on the same chip as the CPU, the considerable communication overhead
     between CPU and coprocessor in a 386/387 system is omitted, letting FPU
     instructions run at the full speed permitted by the implementation. The
     FPU also takes advantage of the on-chip cache and the highly pipelined
     execution unit. The concurrent execution of CPU and coprocessor
     instructions typical for 80x86/80x87 systems is still in existence on
     the 486, but some FPU instructions like FSIN have nearly no concurrency
     with CPU instructions, indicating that they make heavy use of both, CPU
     and FPU resources [53, 1].

     Besides its higher performance, the 486 FPU provides more accurate
     transcendental functions than the 387DX coprocessor, according to my
     tests (see below). To achieve better interrupt latency, FPU instructions
     with a long execution times have been made abortable if an interrupt
     occurs during their execution.

     Due to the considerable amount of heat produced by these chips, and
     taking into consideration the slow air flow provided by the fan in
     garden-variety PC tower cases, I recommend an extra fan directly above
     the CPU for safer operation. If you measure the surface temperature of
     an 486DX after some time of operation in a normal tower case without
     extra cooling, you may well come up with something like 80-90 degrees
     Celsius (that is 175-195 degrees Fahrenheit for those not familiar with
     metric units) [54,55]. You don't need the well known (and expensive)
     IceCap[tm] to effectively cool your CPU; a simple fan mounted directly
     above the CPU can bring the temperature of the chip down to about 50-60
     degrees Celsius (120-140 degrees Fahrenheit), depending on the room
     temperature and the temperature within the PC case (which depends on the
     total power dissipation of all the components and the cooling provided
     by the fan in the system's power supply). According to a simple rule
     known as Arrhenius' Law, lowering the temperature by 10 degrees Celsius
     slows down chemical reactions by a factor of two, so lowering the
     temperature of your CPU by 30 degrees should prolong the life of the
     device by a factor of eight, due to the slower ageing process. If you
     are reluctant to add a fan to your system because of the additional
     noise, settle for a low-noise fan like those available from the German
     manufacturer Pabst (this is not meant to be an advertisement; I am just
     the happy owner of such a fan, and have no other connections to the
     firm).

     The 486DX comes in a 168 pin ceramic PGA (pin grid array). It is
     available in 25 MHz and 33 MHz versions. Since the end of 1991, a 50 MHz
     version has also been available, manufactured by a CHMOS V process (the
     25 MHz and 33 MHz are produced using the CHMOS IV process). Maximum
     power consumption is 3500 mW for the 25 MHz 486 (2600 mW typical), 4500
     mW for the 33 MHz version (3500 mW typical), and 5000 mW (3875 mW
     typical) for the 50 MHz chip.


Intel 486DX2

     The 486DX2 represents the latest generation of Intel CPUs. The "DX2"
     suffix (instead of simply DX) is meant to be an indicator that these are
     clock-doubled versions of the basic CPU. A normal 486DX operates at the
     frequency provided by the incoming clock signal. A 486DX2 instead
     generates a new clock signal from the incoming clock by means of a PLL
     (phase locked loop). In the DX2, this clock signal has twice the
     frequency of the incoming clock, hence the name clock-doubler. All
     internal parts of the 486DX2 (cache, CPU core, and FPU) run at this
     higher frequency; only the bus interface runs at the normal (undoubled)
     speed. Using this technique, an Intel 486DX2-50 can run on an unmodified
     motherboard designed for 25 MHz operation. Since motherboards which run
     at 50 MHz are much harder to design and build than those for 25 MHz,
     this makes a 486DX2-50 system cheaper than an 'equivalent' 486DX-50
     system.

     For all operations that don't access off-chip resources (e.g., register
     operations), a 486DX2-50 provides exactly the same performance as a
     486DX-50, and twice the performance of a 486DX-25. However, since the
     main memory in a 486DX2-50 systems still operates at 25 MHz, all
     instructions involving memory accesses are potentially slower than in a
     486DX-50 system, whose memory also (presumably) runs at 50 MHz. The
     internal cache of the 486 helps this problem a bit, but overall
     performance of a 486DX2-50 is still lower than that of a 486DX-50.
     Intel's documentation [32] shows this drop to be quite small, although
     it is highly dependent upon the particular application.

     The truly wonderful thing about the 486DX2 is that it allows easy
     upgrading of 25 and 33 MHz 486 systems, since the 486DX2 is completely
     pin-compatible with the 486DX: you need just take out the 486DX and plug
     in the new 486DX2. Note that power consumption of the 486DX2-50 equals
     that of the 486DX-50 (4000 mW typical, 4750 mW max.), and that the
     486DX2-66 exceeds this by about 25% (4875 mW typical, 6000 mW max.).
     These chips get *really* hot in a standard PC case with no extra
     cooling, even if they come with an attached heat sink by default. (See
     the discussion above for more detailed information on this problem and
     possible solutions).


Intel 487SX

     The 487SX is the math coprocessor intended for use in 486SX systems. The
     486SX is basically a 486DX without the floating-point unit (FPU) [48,
     50]. (Originally Intel sold 486DXs with a defective FPU as 486SXs but it
     has now completely removed the FPU part from the 486SX mask for mass
     production.) The introduction of the 486SX in 1991 has been viewed by
     many as a marketing 'trick' by Intel to take market share from the 386
     based systems once AMD became successful with their Am386. (AMD has
     taken as much as 40% of the 386 market due to some superior features
     such as higher clock frequency, lower power consumption, fully static
     design, and availability of a 3V version). A 486SX at 20 MHz delivers
     a bit less integer performance than a 40 MHz Am386.

     To add floating-point capabilities to a 486SX based system, it would
     seem to be easiest to swap the 486SX for a 486DX, which includes the FPU
     on-chip. However, Intel has prevented this easy solution by giving the
     486SX a slightly different pin out [48, 51]. Since only three pins are
     assigned differently, clever board manufacturers have come out with
     boards that accept anything from a 486SX-20 to a 486DX2-50 in their CPU
     socket and by doing so provide a clean upgrade path. A set of three
     jumpers ensures correct signal assignment to the changed pins for either
     CPU type. To upgrade 486SX systems without this feature, you are forced
     to buy a 487SX and install it in the "Performance Upgrade Socket"
     (present in most systems).

     Once the 487SX was available, it was quickly found out that it is just a
     normal 486DX with a slightly different pinout [49]. Technically
     speaking, the solution Intel chose was the only practical way to provide
     a 486SX system with the high level of floating-point performance the
     486DX offers. The CPU and FPU must be on the same chip; otherwise, the
     FPU cannot make use of the CPU's internal cache and there would be
     considerable overhead in CPU-FPU communication (similar to a 386/387
     system), nullifying most of the arithmetic speedups over the 387. That
     the 486SX, 487SX, and 486DX are *not* pin-compatible seems to be purely
     for marketing reasons.

     To upgrade a 486SX based system, Intel also offers the OverDrive chip,
     which is just the same as a 487SX with internal clock doubling. It also
     goes into the motherboard's "Performance Upgrade Socket". The OverDrive
     roughly doubles the performance of a 486SX/487SX based system. (For a
     explanation of clock doubling, see the description of the Intel 486DX2
     above.)

     Inserting the 487SX effectively shuts down the 486SX in the 486SX/487SX
     system, so the 486SX could be removed once the 487SX is installed. Since
     the shut down is logical, not electrical, the 486SX still uses power if
     used with the 487SX, although it is inoperational. As with the 486SX,
     the 487SX is currently available in 20 MHz and 25 MHz versions. At 20
     MHz, the 487SX has a power consumption of max. 4000 mW (3250 mW
     typical). It is available in a 169 pin ceramic PGA (pin grid array).


Weitek 1167

     This math coprocessor was the predecessor of the Weitek Abacus 3167. It
     was actually a small printed circuit board with three chips mounted on
     it. In contrast to the Weitek 3167, the 1167 did not have a square root
     instruction; instead, the square root function was computed by means of
     a subroutine in the Weitek transcendental function library. However, the
     1167 did have a mode in which it supported denormal numbers. (The Weitek
     3167 and 4167 only implement the 'fast' mode, in which denormals are not
     supported.) Overall performance of the 1167 is slightly less than that
     of the Weitek 3167.


Weitek 3167

     The 3167 was introduced by Weitek in 1989 and provided the fastest
     floating-point performance possible on a 386 based system at that time.
     The 3167 is not a real coprocessor, strictly speaking, but rather a
     memory-mapped peripheral device. The architecture of the 3167 was
     optimized for speed wherever possible. Besides using the faster memory
     mapped interface to the CPU (the 80x87 uses IO-ports), it does not
     support many of the features of the 80x87 coprocessors, allowing all of
     the chip's resources to be concentrated on the fast execution of the
     basic arithmetic operations. (For a more detailed description of the
     Weitek 3167, see the first chapter of this document.)

     In benchmark comparisons, the Weitek 3167 provided up to 2.5 times the
     performance of an Intel 387DX coprocessor. For example, on a 33 MHz 3167
     the Whetstone benchmark performed at 7574 kWhetstones/sec compared with
     the 3743 kWhetstones/s for the Intel 387DX. (Note, however, that these
     are single-precision results and that the Weitek 3167's performance
     would drop to about half the stated rate for double-precision, while the
     value for the Intel 387DX would change very little.) In any case, before
     the advent of the Intel RapidCAD, the Weitek 3167 usually outperformed
     all 387-compatible coprocessors, even for double-precision operations
     [63,65,69]. For typical applications, the advantage of the Weitek 3167
     over the 387 clones is much smaller. In a benchmark test using
     AutoDesk's 3D-Studio the Weitek 3167 performed at 123% of the Intel
     387DX's performance compared with 106% for the Cyrix FasMath 83D87 and
     118% for the Intel RapidCAD.

     The Weitek Abacus 3167 is packaged in a 121-pin PGA that fits into an
     EMC socket (provided in most 386-based systems). It does *not* fit into
     the normal 68-pin PGA socket intended for a 387 coprocessor.

     To get the best of both worlds, one might want to use a Weitek 3167 and
     a 387 compatible coprocessor in the same system. These coprocessors can
     coexist in the same system without problems; however, most 386-based
     systems contain only one coprocessor socket, usually of the EMC
     (extended math coprocessor) type. Thus, you can install either a 387
     coprocessor or a Weitek 3167, but not both at the same time. There *are*
     small daughter boards available that plug into the EMC socket and
     provide two sockets, an EMC and a standard coprocessor socket.

     At 25 MHz, the Weitek 3167 has a power consumption of max. 1750 mW. At
     33 MHz, max. power consumption is 2250 mW.


Weitek 4167

     The 4167 is a memory-mapped coprocessor that has the same architecture
     as the 3167; it is designed to provide 486-based systems with the
     highest floating-point performance available. It executes coprocessor
     instructions at three to four times the speed of the Weitek 3167.
     Although it is up to 80% faster than the Intel 486 in some benchmarks
     [1,69], the performance advantage for real application is probably more
     like 10%. The introduction of the 486DX2 processors has more or less
     obliterated the need for a Weitek 4167, since the DX2 CPUs provide the
     same performance as the Weitek, as well as the additional features the
     80x87 architecture has that the Weitek does not.

     The Weitek 4167 is packaged in a 142-pin PGA package that is only
     slightly smaller than the 486's package. At 25 MHz, it has a max. power
     consumption of 2500 mW [32].



======================================
Finding out which coprocessor you have
======================================

If you are interested in programming techniques which allow the detection and
differentiation of the coprocessors described above, I refer you to my
COMPTEST program. COMPTEST reliably detects the type and clock frequency of
the CPU and coprocessor installed in your machine. The current version is
CTEST257.ZIP, with future versions to be called CTEST258, CTEST259 and so on.
COMPTEST can correctly identify all of the coprocessors described above, with
the exception of the Weitek chips, for which the detection mechanism is not
that reliable.

COMPTEST is in the public domain and comes with complete source code. It is
available via anonymous ftp from garbo.uwasa.fi and additional ftp sites that
mirror garbo.



================================================
Current coprocessor prices and purchasing advice
================================================

Due to mid-1992 price slashing by Cyrix (and subsequently, Intel) for 387
coprocessors, prices have dropped significantly for all 287 and 387
compatibles, with hardly any price difference between manufacturers. 387DX
compatible coprocessors typically sell for ~US$ 80 for all speeds except for
40 MHz versions, which are typically ~US$ 90. 387SX compatible coprocessors
sell for ~US$ 70, regardless of speed, with the exception of the 33 MHz
versions, which are ~US$ 80. The Intel 287XL sells for ~US$ 90, while the
IIT 2C87 and Cyrix 82S87 each sell for about US$ 60. 8087s may be more
expensive, the price of an 8087-10 being ~US$ 150. I purchased the Intel
RapidCAD for US$ 300 and haven't seen it offered for a better price. I see the
Weitek Abacus 3167-33 being offered for US$ 230 and the 4167-33 being offered
for US$ 850. The Intel 486SX OverDrive is available for ~US$ 570 for the 20 MHz
version, while the Intel 486DX2-50 costs ~650 US$. This price information
reflects the price situation as of 01-11-93; prices can be expected to drop
slightly in the near future.


Which coprocessor should you buy?
---------------------------------
Several computer magazines have published application-level performance
comparisons for various 387 coprocessors and Weitek's ABACUS 3167 and 4167
chips [1,25,68,70]. Applications tested included AutoCAD R11, RenderStar,
Quattro Pro, Lotus 1-2-3, and AutoDesk's 3D-Studio. For most tests,
performance improvements for the 387 clones over Intel's 387DX were small to
marginal, the clones running the applications no more than 5-15% faster than
the Intel 387DX. In the test of 3D-Studio, one of the few programs that
directly supports the Weitek Abacus, the Weitek 3167 improved performance by
23% over an Intel 387DX and the 4167 improved performance by 10% over the
486DX [1].

If you have a demand for high floating-point performance, you should consider
buying a full 486-based system, rather than a 386-based system with an
additional coprocessor. Consider: A 386/33 MHz motherboard currently sells for
~US$ 270; together with the coprocessor, the cost totals ~US$ 350. A 486/33 MHz
ISA motherboard sells for US$ 650. While this means that the 486 system is 85%
more expensive than the 386/387 system, it also provides 100% more integer
and floating-point performance (twice the performance), giving it better
price/performance for math-intensive applications. As prices for 486 chips
fall in the future, the price difference between these two systems should
become even smaller.

If you want to push your 386-based system to its maximum floating-point
performance and can't switch to a 486, I recommend the Intel RapidCAD
chipset. It is both faster [1] and cheaper than installing a Weitek Abacus
3167 in a 386 system, which used to be the highest performing combination
before the RapidCAD was introduced.

In a similar vein, the introduction of the Intel 486DX2 clock-doubler chips
has obliterated the need for a Weitek 4167 to get maximum floating-point
performance out of a 486-based system. A 486DX2-66 performs at or above the
performance level of a 33 MHz Weitek 4167, even if the latter uses single-
precision rather than double-precision. The 486DX-66 is rated by Intel at
24700 double-precision kWhetstones/sec and 3.1 double-precision Linpack
MFLOPS. (Of course, these benchmarks used the highest performance compilers
available. But even with a Turbo Pascal 6.0 program, I managed to squeeze 1.6
double-precision MFLOPS out of the 486DX2-66 for the LLL benchmark [for a
description of these benchmarks, see the paragraph on benchmarks below].)
Although I haven't yet seen 486DX2-66 processors being offered to end users
for upgrade purposes, I recommend the 486DX2-66 to those that need highest
floating-point performance and are planning to buy a new PC. The price
difference between a 33 MHz 486DX motherboard and a 486DX2-66 motherboard is
around US$ 450, well below the price for the Weitek Abacus 4167.



============================================================
The benchmark programs / Coprocessor performance comparisons
============================================================

The performance statistics below were put together with the help of four
widely-known numeric benchmarks and two benchmarks developed by me. Three
Pascal programs, one FORTRAN program, and two assembly language programs were
used. The assembly language programs were linked with Borland's Turbo Pascal
6.0 for library support, especially to include the coprocessor emulator of
the TP 6.0 run-time library. The Pascal programs were compiled with Turbo
Pascal 6.0, a non-optimizing compiler that produces 16-bit code. The FORTRAN
program was compiled using Microsoft's FORTRAN 5.0, an optimizing compiler
that generates 16-bit code. All programs use double-precision variables
(except PEAKFLOP and SAVAGE, which use double extended precision).

Note that the use of a highly optimizing compiler producing 32-bit code can
give much higher performance for some benchmarks. For example, Intel rates
the 33 MHz 386/387DX at 3290 kWhetstones/sec and 0.4 double-precision LINPACK
MFLOPS [28,29], and it rates the Intel 486 at 12300 kWhetstones/sec and 1.6
double-precision LINPACK MFLOPS [30]. The compilers used in these benchmarks
run by the chip's manufacturer are the ones that give the highest performance
available, and sell in the US$ 1000+ price range. Some of them may even be
experimental or prereleased versions not available to the general public. The
relative performance of one coprocessor to another can and does vary greatly
depending on the code generated by compilers. Non-optimizing compilers tend
to generate a high percentage of operations which access variables in memory,
while optimizing compiler produce code that contains many operations
involving registers. Thus it is well possible that coprocessor A beats
coprocessor B running benchmark Z if compiled with compiler C, but B beats A
when the same benchmark is compiled using compiler D.

All benchmark in this overview were run from floppy under a 'bare-bones' MS-
DOS 5.0 without the CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT files. This way, it was made
sure no TSR or other program unnecessarily stole computing resources from the
benchmarks.


Description of benchmarks
-------------------------
PEAKFLOP is the kernel of a fractal computation. It consists mainly of a
tight loop written in assembly code and fine-tuned to give maximum
performance. The whole program fits nicely into even a very small CPU cache.
All variables are held in the CPU's and coprocessor's registers, so the only
memory access is for opcode fetches. The main loop contains three
multiplications and five additions/ subtractions; this ratio is fairly
typical for other floating-point intensive programs as well. Due to the
nature of this program, its MFLOPS rate is hardly to be exceeded by any
program that calculates anything useful; thus the name PEAKFLOP. You will
find the source code for PEAKFLOP in appendix B.

TRNSFORM multiplies an array of 8191 vectors with a 3D-transformation matrix
(a 4x4 matrix). Each vector consists of four double-precision values.
Multiplying vectors with a matrix is a typical operation in the manipulation
(e.g. rotation) of 3D objects which are made up from many vectors describing
the object. This benchmark stresses addition and multiplication as well as
memory access. For each vector, 16 multiplications and 12 additions are used,
and about 256 KB of data is accessed during the benchmark run.

For the IIT 3C87, a special version of TRNSFORM was written that makes use of
the special F4X4 instruction available on that coprocessor. F4X4 does a full
multiplication of a 4x4 matrix by a 4x1 vector in a single instruction.
TRNSFORM is implemented as an optimized assembler program linked with the
Turbo Pascal 6.0 library. The full source code can be found in appendix B.

LLL is short for Lawrence Livermore Loops [21], a set of kernels taken from
real floating-point extensive programs. Some of these loops are vectorizable,
but since we don't deal with vector processors here, this doesn't matter. For
this test, LLL was adapted from the FORTRAN original [20] to Turbo Pascal
6.0. By variable overlaying (similar to FORTRAN's EQUIVALENCE statement),
memory allocation for data was reduced to 64 KB, so all data fits into a
single 64 KB segment. The older version of LLL is used here which contains 14
loops. There also exists a newer, more elaborate version consisting of 24
kernels. The kernels in LLL exercise only multiplication and addition. The
MFLOPS rate reported is the average of the MFLOPS rate of all 14 kernels.
All floating-point variables in the programs are of type DOUBLE.

Both LLL and Whetstone results (see below) are reported as returned by my
COMPTEST test program, in which they have been included as a measure of
coprocessor/FPU performance. COMPTEST has been compiled under Turbo Pascal
6.0 with all 'optimizations' on and using my own run-time library, which
gives higher performance than the one included with TP 6.0. My library is
available as TPL60N18.ZIP from garbo.uwasa.fi and ftp sites that mirror this
site.

Linpack [5] is a well known floating-point benchmark that also heavily
exercises the memory system. Linpack operates on large matrices and takes up
about 570 KB in the version used for this test. This is about the largest
program size a pure DOS system can accommodate. Linpack was originally
designed to estimate performance of BLAS, a library of FORTRAN subroutines
that handles various vector and matrix operations. Note that vendors are
free to supply optimized (e.g., assembly language) versions of BLAS. Linpack
uses two routines from BLAS which are thought to be typical of the matrix
operations used by BLAS. Both routines only use addition/subtraction and
multiplication. The FORTRAN source code for Linpack can be obtained from
the automated mail server [e-mail]. Linpack was compiled using MS
FORTRAN 5.0 in the HUGE memory model (which can handle data structures
larger than 64 KB) and with compiler switches set for maximum optimization.
All floating-point variables in the program are of the DOUBLE type. Linpack
performs the same test repeatedly. The number reported is the maximum MFLOPS
rate returned by Linpack. Linpack MFLOPS ratings for a great number of
machines are contained in [6]. This PostScript document is also available
from [e-mail].

Whetstone [2,3,4] is a synthetic benchmark based upon statistics collected
about the use of certain control and data structures in programs written in
high level languages. Based on these statistics, it tries to mirror a
'typical' HLL program. Whetstone performance is expressed by how many
hypothetical 'whetstone' instructions are executed per second. It was
originally implemented in ALGOL. Unlike PEAKFLOP, LLL, and Linpack,
Whetstone not only uses addition and multiplication but exercises all basic
arithmetic operations as well as some transcendental functions. Whetstone
performance depends on the speed of the CPU as well as on the coprocessor,
while PEAKFLOP, LLL, and Linpack place a heavier burden on the coprocessor/FPU.

There exist both old and new versions of Whetstone. Note that results from
the two versions can differ by as much as 20% for the same test configuration.
For this test, the new version in Pascal from [3] was used. It was compiled
with Turbo Pascal 6.0 and my own library (see above) with all 'optimizations'
on. All computations are performed using the DOUBLE type.

SAVAGE tests the performance of transcendental function evaluation. It is
basically a small loop in which the sin, cos, arctan, ln, exp, and sqrt
functions are combined in a single expression. While sin, cos, arctan, and
sqrt can be evaluated directly with a single 387 coprocessor instruction
each, ln and exp need additional preprocessing for argument reduction and
result conversion. According to [14], the Savage benchmark was devised by
Bill Savage, and is distributed by: The Wohl Engine Company, Ltd., 8200 Shore
Front Parkway, Rockaway Beach, NY 11693, USA. Usually, Savage is programmed
to make 250,000 passes though the loop. Here only 10,000 loops are executed
for a total of 60,000 transcendental function evaluations. The result is
expressed in function evaluations per second. SAVAGE source code was taken
from [7] and compiled with Turbo Pascal 6.0 and my own run-time library
(see above).



Benchmark results using the Intel 386DX CPU and various coprocessors
--------------------------------------------------------------------

My benchmark results for 387 coprocessors, coprocessor emulators and the
Intel RapidCAD and Intel 486 CPUs, using the programs described above, on
an Intel 386DX system:


       33.3 MHz       PEAKFLOP TRNSFORM LLL     Linpack Whetstone Savage
                      MFLOPS   MFLOPS   MFLOPS  MFLOPS  kWhet/sec Func/sec

       Intel 386DX WITH:
       EM87 emulator  0.0070   0.0040   0.0050  0.0050         26      418 ##
       Franke387 emu. 0.0307   0.0246   0.0194  0.0179        137     3335 $$
       TP/MS-FORT emu 0.0263   0.0227   0.0167  0.0158        133     3160 %%
       Q387 emulator  0.0920   0.0664   0.0305  0.0304        251     4796 ((
       Intel 387DX    0.7647   0.6004   0.3283  0.2676       2046    43860
       ULSI 83C87     1.0097   0.6609   0.3239  0.2598       2089    47431
       IIT 3C87       0.8455   0.5957   0.3198  0.2646       2203    49020
       IIT 3C87,4X4   0.8455   1.4334   0.3198  0.2646       2203    49020 @@
       C&T 38700      0.9455   0.6907   0.3338  0.2700       2376    62565
       Cyrix 387+     0.9286   0.6806   0.3293  0.2669       2435    66890
       Cyrix EMC87    1.0400   0.6628   0.3352  0.2808       2540    71685 //

       Intel RapidCAD 1.8572   1.5798   0.6072  0.4533       3953    72464
       Intel 486DX    2.0800   1.7779   0.9387  0.6682       5143    82192



       40 MHz         PEAKFLOP TRNSFORM LLL     Linpack Whetstone Savage
                      MFLOPS   MFLOPS   MFLOPS  MFLOPS  kWhet/sec Func/sec

       Intel 386DX WITH:
       EM87 emulator  0.0084   0.0080   0.0060  0.0060         31      502 ##
       Franke387 emu. 0.0369   0.0295   0.0233  0.0215        164     4002 $$
       TP/MS-FORT emu 0.0316   0.0273   0.0200  0.0190        160     3794 %%
       Q387 emulator  0.1103   0.0798   0.0365  0.0364        301     5758 ((
       Intel 387DX    0.9204   0.7212   0.3932  0.3211       2428    52677
       ULSI 83C87     1.2093   0.7936   0.3890  0.3120       2528    56926
       IIT 3C87       1.0196   0.7145   0.3834  0.3179       2663    58766
       IIT 3C87,4x4   1.0196   1.7244   0.3834  0.3179       2663    58766 @@
       C&T 38700      1.0722   0.7908   0.4007  0.3222       2837    74906
       Cyrix 387+     1.1305   0.8162   0.3945  0.3208       2946    80322
       Cyrix EMC87    1.2381   0.7963   0.4025  0.3324       3061    86083 //

       Intel RapidCAD 2.2128   1.8931   0.7377  0.5432       4810    86957
       Intel 486DX    2.4762   2.1335   1.1110  0.8204       6195    98522



Benchmark results using the Cyrix 486DLC CPU and various coprocessors
---------------------------------------------------------------------

The Cyrix 486DLC is the latest entry into the market of 386DX replacement
processors. It features an Intel 486SX-compatible instruction set, a 1 KB on-
chip cache, and a 16x16 bit hardware multiplier. The RISC-like execution unit
of the 486DLC executes many instructions in a single clock cycle. The
hardware multiplier multiplies 16-bit quantities in 3 clock cycles, as
compared to 12-25 cycles on a standard Intel 386DX. This is especially useful
in address calculations (code from non-optimizing compilers may contain many
MUL instructions for array accesses) and for software floating-point
arithmetic. The 1 KB cache helps the 486DLC to overcome some of the
limitations of the 386 bus interface, and although its hit rate averages only
about 65% under normal program conditions, a 5-15% overall performance
increase can usually be seen for both integer and floating-point-intensive
applications when it is enabled.

The 486DLC's internal cache is a unified data/instruction write-through type,
and can be configured as either a direct mapped or a 2-way set associative
cache. For compatibility reasons, the cache is disabled after a processor
reset and must be enabled with the help of a small routine provided by
Cyrix. Cyrix has also defined some additional cache control signals for some
of the 486DLC pins, intended to improve communication between the on-chip
cache and an external cache. Current 386 systems ignore these signals, since
they are not defined for the standard Intel 386DX. However, future systems
designed with the 486DLC in mind may take advantage of them for increased
performance.

In existing 386 systems, DMA transfers (e.g., by a SCSI controller or a
soundcard) may cause the 486DLC's entire on-chip cache to be flushed, since
no other means exist to enforce consistency between the cache contents and
main memory. This reduces the performance of the 486DLC in these cases. The
486DLC on-chip cache does, however, allow specification of up to four non-
cacheable regions, which is particularly useful if your system has memory
mapped peripherals (e.g., a Weitek coprocessor).

Although I successfully ran my test programs on the Cyrix chip with all
coprocessors, not all of them work well with the 486DLC in all circumstances.
The IIT 3C87, the Cyrix 83D87 (chips manufactured prior to November 1991),
and the Cyrix EMC87 should not be used with the 486DLC, since they may cause
the computer to lock up if the FSAVE and FRSTOR instructions are used. (These
instructions are typically used in protected mode multiple task environments
to save and restore the coprocessor state for each task. Note that Microsoft
Windows also fits this description.) According to Cyrix, this problem occurs
only with first revision 486DLCs (sample chips) and is fixed on newer ones.
To be on the safe side, I recommend using the Cyrix 387+ with the 486DLC,
both for assured compatibility and for best performance. Note that 387+ is a
'Europe only' name and that this chip is called 83D87 elsewhere, just like
the old version. You need to get a 83D87 produced after about October 1991
to guarantee that is works correctly with any 486DLC; the same caveat applies
to the Cyrix 486SLC and the Cyrix 83S87. If you already have a Cyrix
coprocessor, use my COMPTEST program to find out whether you have a 'new' or
'old' coprocessor. COMPTEST is available as CTEST257.ZIP via anonymous ftp
from garbo.uwasa.fi (in the /systest directory) and other ftp servers that
mirror garbo.

The Cyrix 486DLC is currently the 386 'clone' with the highest integer
performance. With the internal cache enabled, integer performance of the
486DLC can be up to 80% higher than that of an Intel 386DX at the same clock
frequency, with the average speed gain for most applications being about 35%.
Floating-point applications are typically accelerated by about 15%-30% when
using a Cyrix 486DLC (with its cache enabled) instead of the Intel 386DX.


       33.3 MHz       PEAKFLOP TRNSFORM LLL     Linpack Whetstone Savage
                      MFLOPS   MFLOPS   MFLOPS  MFLOPS  kWhet/sec Func/sec
       Cyrix 486DLC
       (cache off) WITH:
       EM87 emulator  0.0089   0.0082   0.0062  0.0063         31      472 ##
       Franke387 emu. 0.0402   0.0324   0.0258  0.0240        184     4807 $$
       TP/MS-FORT emu 0.0346   0.0288   0.0206  0.0212        173     4401 %%
       Q387 emulator  0.1214   0.0810   0.0368  0.0382        320     6020 ((
       Intel 387DX    0.8455   0.6552   0.3659  0.3033       2249    48780
       ULSI 83C87     1.1818   0.7543   0.3752  0.3026       2381    53476
       IIT 3C87       0.9541   0.6609   0.3653  0.3036       2476    55814
       IIT 3C87,4X4   0.9541   1.4988   0.3653  0.3036       2476    55814 @@
       C&T 38700      1.1183   0.7644   0.3796  0.3087       2703    73350
       Cyrix 387+     1.1305   0.7445   0.3727  0.3060       2731    81967
       Cyrix EMC87    1.2236   0.7593   0.3823  0.3144       2908    88889 //

       Intel RapidCAD 1.8572   1.5798   0.6072  0.4533       3953    72464
       Intel 486DX    2.0800   1.7779   0.9387  0.6682       5143    82192



       40.0 MHz       PEAKFLOP TRNSFORM LLL     Linpack Whetstone Savage
                      MFLOPS   MFLOPS   MFLOPS  MFLOPS  kWhet/sec Func/sec
       Cyrix 486DLC
       (cache off) WITH:
       EM87 emulator  0.0107   0.0098   0.0075  0.0075         37      567 ##
       Franke387 emu. 0.0488   0.0392   0.0311  0.0288        223     5808 $$
       TP/MS-FORT emu 0.0416   0.0345   0.0246  0.0253        208     5284 %%
       Q387 emulator  0.1463   0.0973   0.0442  0.0458        384     7237 ((
       Intel 387DX    1.0196   0.7880   0.4375  0.3644       2712    58479
       ULSI 83C87     1.4247   0.9064   0.4506  0.3630       2868    64171
       IIT 3C87       1.1556   0.7963   0.4399  0.3611       2988    66964
       IIT 3C87,4X4   1.1556   1.7916   0.4399  0.3611       2988    66964 @@
       C&T 38700      1.3333   0.9210   0.4548  0.3708       3254    88106
       Cyrix 387+     1.3507   0.8958   0.4477  0.3754       3297    98361
       Cyrix EMC87    1.4648   0.9136   0.4548  0.3773       3505   106572 //

       Intel RapidCAD 2.2128   1.8931   0.7377  0.5432       4810    86957
       Intel 486DX    2.4762   2.1335   1.1110  0.8204       6195    98522



       33.3 MHz       PEAKFLOP TRNSFORM LLL     Linpack Whetstone Savage
                      MFLOPS   MFLOPS   MFLOPS  MFLOPS  kWhet/sec Func/sec
       Cyrix 486DLC
       (cache on) WITH:
       EM87 emulator  0.0099   0.0089   0.0068  0.0069         35      550 ##
       Franke387 emu. 0.0462   0.0362   0.0288  0.0265        205     5445 $$
       TP/MS-FORT emu 0.0410   0.0330   0.0234  0.0241        198     5339 %%
       Q387 emulator  0.1344   0.0902   0.0389  0.0403        339     6241 ((
       Intel 387DX    0.8525   0.6552   0.3941  0.3279       2332    49834
       ULSI 83C87     1.2093   0.7543   0.4068  0.3270       2478    57197
       IIT 3C87       0.9720   0.6609   0.3959  0.3295       2579    57252
       IIT 3C87,4X4   0.9720   1.5087   0.3959  0.3295       2579    57252 @@
       C&T 38700      1.1305   0.7644   0.4126  0.3343       2839    75949
       Cyrix 387+     1.1429   0.7445   0.4023  0.3310       2866    85349
       Cyrix EMC87    1.2381   0.7593   0.4150  0.3412       3051    93897 //

       Intel RapidCAD 1.8572   1.5798   0.6072  0.4533       3953    72464
       Intel 486DX    2.0800   1.7779   0.9387  0.6682       5143    82192



       40.0 MHz       PEAKFLOP TRNSFORM LLL     Linpack Whetstone Savage
                      MFLOPS   MFLOPS   MFLOPS  MFLOPS  kWhet/sec Func/sec
       Cyrix 486DLC
       (cache on) WITH:
       EM87 emulator  0.0118   0.0107   0.0082  0.0082         42      659 ##
       Franke387 emu. 0.0565   0.0438   0.0350  0.0313        248     6585 $$
       TP/MS-FORT emu 0.0491   0.0395   0.0279  0.0296        238     6408 %%
       Q387 emulator  0.1610   0.1084   0.0470  0.0484        407     7509 ((
       Intel 387DX    1.0297   0.7880   0.4748  0.3937       2801    59821
       ULSI 83C87     1.4445   0.9028   0.4891  0.3926       2976    65789
       IIT 3C87       1.1686   0.7963   0.4734  0.3916       3096    68729
       IIT 3C87,4X4   1.1686   1.8057   0.4734  0.3916       3096    68729 @@
       C&T 38700      1.3685   0.9173   0.4958  0.4012       3401    91185
       Cyrix 387+     1.3867   0.8958   0.4887  0.3962       3448   102564
       Cyrix EMC87    1.4857   0.9100   0.4959  0.4091       3676   112360 //

       Intel RapidCAD 2.2128   1.8931   0.7377  0.5432       4810    86957
       Intel 486DX    2.4762   2.1335   1.1110  0.8204       6195    98522




Benchmark results using the C&T 38600DX CPU and various coprocessors
--------------------------------------------------------------------

The Chips&Technologies 38600DX CPU is marketed as a 100% compatible
replacement for the Intel 386DX CPU. Unlike AMD's Am386, which uses microcode
that is identical to the Intel 386DX's, the C&T 38600DX uses microcode
developed independently by C&T using "clean-room" techniques. C&T even
included the 386DX's "undocumented" LOADALL386 instruction into the
instruction set to provide full compatibility with the 386DX. In my tests,
however, I observed that the 38600DX has severe problems with the CPU-
coprocessor communication, which causes the floating-point performance to
drop below that of the Intel 386DX/Intel 387DX for most programs. This
problem exists with all available 387-compatible coprocessors (ULSI 83C87,
IIT 3C87, Cyrix EMC87, Cyrix 83D87, Cyrix 387+, C&T 38700, Intel 387DX). A
net.aquaintance also did tests with the 38600DX and arrived at similar
results. He contacted C&T and they said that they were aware of the problem.

Some instructions execute faster on the C&T 38600DX than on the 386DX, giving
an average speedup of 5-10% for integer applications. C&T also produces a
38605DX CPU that includes a 512 byte instruction cache and provides a further
performance increase. However, the 38605DX needs a bigger socket (144-pin
PGA) and is therefore *not* pin-compatible with the 386DX. Tests using the
38600DX were run at 33.3 MHz, as a 40 MHz version was not available as of 09-
17-92 and running the 33 MHz chip version at 40 MHz locked up the machine
frequently. Unfortunately, tests using the Intel 387DX consistently locked up
in the TRNSFORM benchmark when run at 33.3 MHz. It ran fine at 20 MHz, and
the results were scaled to show expected performance at 33.3 MHz.


       33.3 MHz       PEAKFLOP TRNSFORM LLL     Linpack Whetstone Savage
                      MFLOPS   MFLOPS   MFLOPS  MFLOPS  kWhet/sec Func/sec

       C&T 38600DX WITH:
       Intel 387DX    0.7376   0.5620   0.3337  0.2636       2066    45489
       ULSI 83C87     0.5226   0.4690   0.3236  0.2654       2087    43228
       IIT 3C87       0.7879   0.5762   0.3397  0.2674       2263    51195
       IIT 3C87,4X4   0.7879   0.6181   0.3397  0.2674       2263    51195 @@
       C&T 38700      0.5977   0.5572   0.3463  0.2681       2338    63966
       Cyrix 387+     0.5896   0.5508   0.3438  0.2673       2375    66741

       Intel RapidCAD 1.8572   1.5798   0.6072  0.4533       3953    72464
       Intel 486      2.0800   1.7779   0.9387  0.6682       5143    82192


       For comparison:

                      PEAKFLOP TRNSFORM LLL     Linpack Whetstone Savage
                      MFLOPS   MFLOPS   MFLOPS  MFLOPS  kWhet/sec Func/sec

       i486DX2-66     4.1601   3.4227   1.6531  1.3010      10655   163934
       i486DX2-50     3.0589   2.6665   1.2537  0.9744       7962   123203
       i387, 20 MHz   0.2253   0.3271   0.1434  0.1171        952    21739 ++
       i387DX, 20 MHz 0.3567   0.4444   0.1484  0.1161       1034    24155 &&
       i80287, 5 MHz  0.0281   0.0310   0.0242  0.0222        150     3261 !!
       i8087,9.54 MHz 0.0636   0.0705   0.0321  0.0219        234     5782 **



Benchmark notes and footnotes
-----------------------------

Hardware configuration for test of 387 coprocessors with C&T 38600DX, Intel
386DX, Cyrix 486DLC, and Intel RapidCAD CPUs:

     System A: Motherboard with Forex chip set, 128 KB CPU Cache, 8 MB RAM


Hardware configuration for test of 486 FPU (extra fan for 40 MHz operation):

     System B: Motherboard with SIS chip set, 256 KB CPU Cache, 8 MB RAM


 ## EM87 V1.2 by Ron Kimball is a public domain coprocessor emulator that
    loads as a TSR. It uses INT 7 traps emitted by 80286, 80386, or 486SX
    systems with no coprocessor upon encountering coprocessor instructions
    to catch coprocessor instructions and emulate them. Whetstone and Savage
    benchmarks for this test were compiled with the original TP 6.0 library,
    as EM87 chokes on the 387 specific FSIN and FCOS instructions used in my
    own library if a 387 is detected. Obviously EM87 identifies itself as a
    387, but it has no support for 387-specific instructions.

 $$ Franke387 is a commercial 387 emulator that is also available in a
    shareware version. For this test, shareware version V2.4 was used.
    Franke387 unlike many other emulators supports all 387 instructions.
    It is loaded as a device driver and uses INT 7 to trap coprocessor
    instructions.

 (( Q387 is an emulator that is distributed as a shareware program by
    Quickware of Austin, Texas. As the name implies, this emulator uses
    386 specific code and supports the full 387 instruction set. The
    program is about 330 kByte in size and loads completely into extended
    memory, using absolutely no DOS memory. It is loaded as a TSR and
    requires an EMM (expanded memory manager) to be present. The emulation
    uses the INT 7 mechanism. The version of Q387 used was 3.0a.

 %% These benchmarks were run using the built-in coprocessor emulators of
    the TP 6.0 (for Savage, LLL, Whetstone, TRNSFORM, PEAKFLOP) and the MS
    FORTRAN 5.0 (for Linpack) run-time libraries by forcing the libraries
    into not using a coprocessor by using the environment settings NO87=NC
    and 87=N.

 @@ The 3C87 specific F4X4 instruction was used in the vector transformation
    benchmark.

 // The EMC87 was used in the 387-compatible mode only. The faster memory-
    mapped mode was *not* used. Times should therefore be identical to the
    Cyrix 83D87.

 ++ Older motherboard with no chip set (discrete logic), no CPU cache, 16 MB
    RAM

 && System A, CPU cache disabled via extended set-up, turbo-switch set to
    half speed (that is, 20 MHz)

 !! 80386 @ 20 MHz / Intel 80287 @ 5 MHz, no CPU cache, 4 MB RAM due to the
    fast CPU used here, performance figures are somewhat higher than can be
    expected for a 80286/287 combination, except for the PEAKFLOP benchmark,
    which is basically coprocessor limited.

 ** 8086/8087 system with 640 KB RAM


Benchmark results for Weitek coprocessors
------------------------------------------
Since neither a Weitek coprocessor nor a compiler that generates code for the
Weitek chips were available to me, performance data for the Weitek Abacus is
given here according to [31,32] and scaled to show performance of a 33 MHz
system. The benchmarks were compiled using highly-optimizing 32-bit
compilers.

                              Single Prec.     Double Prec.    Double Prec.

                              3167    4167     3167    4167      387    486

         Linpack MFLOPS        1.8     5.0      0.8     3.2      0.4    1.6
         Whetstone kWhet/sec  7470   22700     4900   14000     3290  12300

Note that for the Intel coprocessors, running programs in single vs. double-
precision doesn't provide much of an performance advantage since all internal
calculations are always done in extended precision. Using Weitek
coprocessors, however, performance nearly doubles in single-precision mode.
For double-precision calculations using only basic arithmetic, the Weitek
Abacus can at most provide performance at twice the level of the respective
Intel coprocessor (387/486) at the same clock speed.


         Comparison of floating-point performance [30,32]

                                      single-precision

                          Weitek 4167-33    Intel 486-33   Intel 486DX2-66

         Linpack MFLOPS            5.0           1.8             3.5
         Whetstones kWhet/sec    22700         12700           25500


                                      double-precision

                        Weitek 4167-33  Intel 486-33 Intel 486DX2-66

         LINPACK MFLOPS            3.5           1.6             3.1
         kWhetstones/sec         14000         12300           24700



=============================================================================
Clock-cycle timings for coprocessor instructions on various coprocessor chips
=============================================================================

Speed of various coprocessor instructions, measured in clock cycles, as
captured by my program 87TIMES. Error is +/- one clock cycle, except for the
Intel 80287. Times for the 80287 were determined on a system with a 20 MHz
80386 and a 5 MHz Intel 80287. Therefore, times may differ from a genuine
80286/287 system, especially for those instructions that access an operand in
memory. Since the times are stated as the number of coprocessor clock cycles
used, the faster 386 which can execute four clock cycles where the 80287
executes one clock cycle may decrease memory access times as seen by the
coprocessor.

The CPU used in testing the 387 coprocessors was an Intel 386DX. Note that
due to the improved coprocessor interface of the Cyrix 486DLC the execution
time of most coprocessor instructions drops by 2-3 clock cycles when used
with this CPU.


                  Intel  Intel  Cyrix Cyrix C&T   ULSI  IIT  Intel Intel
                  i486 RapidCAD 83D87 387+  38700 83C87 3C87 387DX 80387

             FLD1    4      3     14    14    14    18    24    23    26
             FLDZ    4      3     14    14    14    18    24    23    31
            FLDPI    7      8     14    15    14    18    24    38    45
           FLDLG2    7      8     14    14    14    18    24    33    45
           FLDL2T    7      8     14    14    14    19    24    38    45
           FLDL2E    7      8     14    14    14    19    24    38    45
           FLDLN2    7      8     14    14    14    19    24    38    45
        FLD ST(0)    4      4     14    14    14    14    24    20    21
        FST ST(1)    3      4     14    14    14    14    19    18    22
       FSTP ST(0)    4      4     14    14    14    15    19    19    22
       FSTP ST(1)    4      4     15    15    14    15    19    20    22
        FLD ST(1)    4      4     14    14    14    14    24    18    21
       FXCH ST(1)    4      4     14    20    14    19    24    24    27
      FILD [Word]   12     16     33    37    32    42    38    47    62
     FILD [DWord]    8     11     26    26    21    32    28    35    45
     FILD [QWord]    9     15     30    30    25    36    32    34    54
      FLD [DWord]    3      5     26    26    21    23    28    20    25
      FLD [QWord]    3      7     30    30    25    27    32    24    35
      FLD [TByte]    5     11     46    46    46    46    47    46    57
     FBLD [TByte]   83     90     66    86   106   146   197    71   278
      FIST [Word]   31     31     37    40    37    42    51    69    90
     FIST [DWord]   29     30     35    40    35    40    49    66    84
      FST [DWord]    7      7     35    37    32    40    33    37    40
      FST [QWord]    8      9     43    43    39    47    40    45    51
     FISTP [Word]   32     32     42    40    37    43    46    70    90
    FISTP [DWord]   31     31     40    40    35    41    50    67    87
    FISTP [QWord]   29     29     44    44    42    48    56    73    92
     FSTP [DWord]    8      8     38    36    32    41    35    38    43
     FSTP [QWord]    9      9     46    43    39    48    42    46    49
     FSTP [TByte]    8      8     50    45    49    50    48    53    58
    FBSTP [TByte]  170    172     98    98   114   129   218   144   533
            FINIT   17     31     15    16    15    15    16    16    25
            FCLEX    7     20     15    16    16    16    16    16    25
             FCHS    7      8     14    15    14    14    19    30    33
             FABS    5      5     14    15    14    14    19    30    33
             FXAM   12     13     14    15    14    14    19    39    43
             FTST    5      5     19    25    14    24    24    34    38
           FSTENV   67     82    125   125   124   132   124   159   165
           FLDENV   44     59    106   106   112   120   106   119   129
            FSAVE  181    169    355   355   374   361   376   469   511
           FRSTOR  130    203    358   358   385   372   371   420   456
      FSTSW [mem]    4      5     14    14    14    14    14    14    17
         FSTSW AX    3      4     12    12    11    11    11    11    14
      FSTCW [mem]    4      5     14    14    13    13    13    14    18
      FLDCW [mem]    4     11     26    26    31    32    27    32    36
    FADD ST,ST(0)    8      9     19    20    19    19    24    24    32
    FADD ST,ST(1)    9      9     19    20    19    18    24    20    32
    FADD ST(1),ST   10     10     19    20    19    18    24    24    37
   FADDP ST(1),ST   11     11     19    19    19    16    24    25    37
     FADD [DWord]    9     10     25    28    22    23    23    21    34
     FADD [QWord]    9     10     32    32    26    27    27    25    38
     FIADD [Word]   20     21     34    34    33    40    40    52    80
    FIADD [DWord]   20     21     27    28    27    30    30    37    61
    FSUB ST(1),ST   10     10     19    20    19    19    24    24    38
   FSUBR ST(1),ST    9     10     19    22    19    19    24    27    38
  FSUBRP ST(1),ST   10     10     19    19    22    20    24    25    38
     FSUB [DWord]   11     12     27    28    27    23    29    27    32
     FSUB [QWord]   11     12     32    32    31    27    33    26    44
     FISUB [Word]   21     21     34    34    34    40    40    52    80
    FISUB [DWord]   21     22     27    28    27    29    30    40    60
    FMUL ST,ST(1)   16     17     19    25    24    24    29    38    57
    FMUL ST(1),ST   16     17     19    24    24    24    29    40    62
   FMULP ST(1),ST   17     17     19    24    24    25    29    40    58
     FIMUL [Word]   22     23     40    40    37    46    46    52    80
    FIMUL [DWord]   22     23     27    28    27    36    35    45    68
     FMUL [DWord]   11     12     27    28    27    28    29    25    45
     FMUL [QWord]   14     15     32    32    31    32    33    37    61
    FDIV ST,ST(0)   73     74     26    40    59    54    54    89   100
    FDIV ST,ST(1)   73     74     36    45    59    54    54    77   100
    FDIV ST(1),ST   73     74     36    45    59    55    54    78   102
   FDIVR ST(1),ST   73     74     36    45    59    54    54    77   102
  FDIVRP ST(1),ST   73     74     36    44    59    55    54    76   106
     FIDIV [Word]   84     85     52    58    75    76    76   105   141
    FIDIV [DWord]   84     85     45    46    65    65    65   101   123
     FDIV [DWord]   73     74     45    46    63    56    59    77   101
     FDIV [QWord]   73     74     50    50    67    60    63    78   103
      FSQRT (0.0)   25     25     19    19    14    19    24    29    37
      FSQRT (1.0)   83     84     36    74    54    89    59   109   132
      FSQRT (L2T)   86     87     36    74    54    89    59   104   137
    FXTRACT (L2T)   17     17     19    19    19    28    79    53    72
    FSCALE (PI,5)   30     30     36    24    24    49    79    59    82
     FRNDINT (PI)   31     31     19    29    24    34    29    49    82
    FPREM (99,PI)   58     59     54    99    44    54    49    79    96
    FPREM1(99,PI)   90     91     54    99    44    59    54   104   121
             FCOM    5      6     15    20    19    25    19    29    32
            FCOMP    6      6     15    19    19    25    19    30    33
           FCOMPP    7      7     15    19    19    25    19    31    40
     FICOM [Word]   16     17     34    34    33    46    34    58    76
    FICOM [DWord]   16     16     21    28    21    35    23    45    57
     FCOM [DWord]    5      6     21    28    22    23    23    27    34
     FCOM [QWord]    5      8     27    32    25    27    27    31    39
       FSIN (0.0)   24     24     14    99    14    19    24    39    43
       FSIN (1.0)  310    313    114   164   144   494   219   509   596
        FSIN (PI)   88     89    118   189    64    64   214   134   152
       FSIN (LG2)  292    295     72    89   139   454   184   449   531
       FSIN (L2T)  299    302    123   179   164   469   214   454   536
       FCOS (0.0)   24     24     19   159    14    19    24    34    42
       FCOS (1.0)  302    305     84   104   139   489   214   459   547
        FCOS (PI)   88     89    154   254    64    64   224   199   232
       FCOS (LG2)  300    303    108   149   139   454   194   504   583
       FCOS (L2T)  307    310    159   239   164   469   224   509   601
    FSINCOS (0.0)   25     25     14    19    19    18    34    38    55
    FSINCOS (1.0)  353    356    124   174   254   493   419   538   636
     FSINCOS (PI)  105    106    162   263    79    68   424   228   277
    FSINCOS (LG2)  340    343    119   159   249   458   359   533   627
    FSINCOS (L2T)  347    350    168   248   274   473   424   538   646
      FPTAN (0.0)   25     25     14    19    19    18    29    38    46
      FPTAN (1.0)  266    269    119   149   184   538   309   323   396
       FPTAN (PI)  145    146    134   228   104   108   304   168   211
      FPTAN (LG2)  244    246     94   129   179   498   274   298   363
      FPTAN (L2T)  247    249    139   219   204   513   304   298   365
     FPATAN (0.0)   38     39     19    24    19    20    29    95    93
     FPATAN (1.0)  294    298    124   159    29   375   604   360   433
      FPATAN (PI)  304    308    139   188   279   360   424   375   472
     FPATAN (LG2)  290    293    128   154   269   365   379   375   448
     FPATAN (L2T)  304    308    144   189   274   359   424   375   468
      F2XM1 (0.0)   25     25     14    14    14    19    24    34    37
      F2XM1 (LN2)  209    211     89   119   169   394   284   299   348
      F2XM1 (LG2)  204    206     78   104   159   379   284   294   337
      FYL2X (1.0)   60     61     36    39    24    75    94   115   127
       FYL2X (PI)  294    297    108   163   249   450   359   395   504
      FYL2X (LG2)  311    314    108   159   249   460   339   410   518
      FYL2X (L2T)  293    296    108   164   249   439   359   390   501
    FYL2XP1 (LG2)  334    337     99   169   234   460   284   435   538



                                  80386 +  80386 +   80386 +  80386 +
                     Intel Intel  Q387     Franke387 TP 6.0   EM87
                     8087  80287  Emulator Emulator  Emulator Emulator

             FLD1    26     55      51      481       422      1626
             FLDZ    21     53      39      480       416      1646
            FLDPI    26     55      51      486       443      1626
           FLDLG2    26     56      51      486       423      1626
           FLDL2T    26     55      51      486       440      1626
           FLDL2E    26     53      52      486       423      1626
           FLDLN2    26     55      52      486       441      1626
        FLD ST(0)    31     55      57      493       362      1851
        FST ST(1)    26     54      61      489       355      1931
       FSTP ST(0)    26     54      46      507       358      2115
       FSTP ST(1)    21     55      66      507       356      2116
        FLD ST(1)    26     55      54      493       362      1852
       FXCH ST(1)    21     57      80      497       486      2187
      FILD [Word]    58     90     122      667       712      2259
     FILD [DWord]    64     74     121      608       812      2164
     FILD [QWord]    74     93     179      652       707      2971
      FLD [DWord]    49     44     106      633       473      2077
      FLD [QWord]    54     57     118      641       524      2336
      FLD [TByte]    59     45     102      607       492      2063
     FBLD [TByte]   309    310     736     2019      1512     17827
      FIST [Word]    79     72     143      854       766      2418
     FIST [DWord]    84     80     136      865       518      2325
      FST [DWord]    89     85     124      686       441      2200
      FST [QWord]    99     92     135      703       516      2481
     FISTP [Word]    79     80     154      864       794      2620
    FISTP [DWord]    79     81     144      879       541      2523
    FISTP [QWord]    88     75     184      904       916      3226
     FSTP [DWord]    89     75     133      713       467      2400
     FSTP [QWord]    93     72     142      732       538      2678
     FSTP [TByte]    49     21     111      685       467      2124
    FBSTP [TByte]   528    472    1124     3305      1555     27013
            FINIT    11     10    1079      742       641      1369
            FCLEX    11     10      48      440       323       912
             FCHS    21     54      45      460       354      1744
             FABS    21     54      43      456       349      1738
             FXAM    21     54      72      481       380      1551
             FTST    51     75      70      585       386      2721
           FSTENV    54     57     827      928       519      2104
           FLDENV    48     50     780     1125       450      1631
            FSAVE   214    244    3929     1949       976      2749
           FRSTOR   209    227    2901     2182       657      2225
      FSTSW [mem]    28     10      87      516       401      1189
         FSTSW AX   N/A     55      57      451       N/A       N/A
      FSTCW [mem]    28     10      74      506       359      1167
      FLDCW [mem]    19     47      91      524       437      1584
    FADD ST,ST(0)    86    128     136      643       706      2805
    FADD ST,ST(1)    85    116     146      707       808      3093
    FADD ST(1),ST    92    131     157      664       812      3146
   FADDP ST(1),ST    92    129     164      704       799      3143
     FADD [DWord]   105    122     221      874       969      3139
     FADD [QWord]   115    122     232      888      1021      3396
     FIADD [Word]   115    122     238      940      1211      3330
    FIADD [DWord]   125    122     239      882      1297      3215
    FSUB ST(1),ST    88    130     171      738       817      3156
   FSUBR ST(1),ST    96    132     181      740       868      3004
  FSUBRP ST(1),ST    99    132     193      733       805      3301
     FSUB [DWord]   119    122     230      918      1018      3127
     FSUB [QWord]   129    123     242      932      1070      3632
     FISUB [Word]   115    123     268      977      1081      3802
    FISUB [DWord]   125    125     289      940       980      4161
    FMUL ST,ST(1)   145    151     297      810      1368      3924
    FMUL ST(1),ST   145    151     296      817      1377      3962
   FMULP ST(1),ST   148    168     304      840      1365      4164
     FIMUL [Word]   132    151     384     1039      1517      4039
    FIMUL [DWord]   141    151     383      980      1643      3976
     FMUL [DWord]   125    123     345      948      1480      3445
     FMUL [QWord]   175    192     387      991      1602      4416
    FDIV ST,ST(0)   201    207     274      726      1536      9789
    FDIV ST,ST(1)   203    218     299      808      1658     10332
    FDIV ST(1),ST   207    214     299      825      1655     10342
   FDIVR ST(1),ST   201    206     302      819      1806     10213
  FDIVRP ST(1),ST   201    205     309      845      1803     10409
     FIDIV [Word]   237    227     390      980      1779     11225
    FIDIV [DWord]   246    227     411      944      1680     11572
     FDIV [DWord]   229    226     352      893      1722     10577
     FDIV [QWord]   236    227     391      993      1777     10829
      FSQRT (0.0)    21     57      60      512       382      1755
      FSQRT (1.0)   186    206     294     1106      2504     37836
      FSQRT (L2T)   186    207     295     1398      2467     37925
    FXTRACT (L2T)    51     56     155      726       571      3326
    FSCALE (PI,5)    41     56      95      817       443      3194
     FRNDINT (PI)    51     58     136      808       800      7092
    FPREM (99,PI)    81    131     322     1696       941      4098
    FPREM1(99,PI)   N/A    N/A     384     1625       N/A       N/A
             FCOM    56     75     155      582       483      2799
            FCOMP    61     92     160      616       485      2983
           FCOMPP    61     90     149      661       476      3198
     FICOM [Word]    79     77     231      808       861      3654
    FICOM [DWord]    89     77     231      750       964      3684
     FCOM [DWord]    74     75     214      741       625      3643
     FCOM [QWord]    74     76     205      754       667      3771
       FSIN (0.0)   N/A    N/A     137      639       N/A       N/A
       FSIN (1.0)   N/A    N/A     997     4640       N/A       N/A
        FSIN (PI)   N/A    N/A     322     2488       N/A       N/A
       FSIN (LG2)   N/A    N/A     978     3911       N/A       N/A
       FSIN (L2T)   N/A    N/A    1005     3767       N/A       N/A
       FCOS (0.0)   N/A    N/A     182      740       N/A       N/A
       FCOS (1.0)   N/A    N/A     988     4777       N/A       N/A
        FCOS (PI)   N/A    N/A     337     2557       N/A       N/A
       FCOS (LG2)   N/A    N/A     976     4176       N/A       N/A
       FCOS (L2T)   N/A    N/A    1001     3905       N/A       N/A
    FSINCOS (0.0)   N/A    N/A     225      714       N/A       N/A
    FSINCOS (1.0)   N/A    N/A    1841     6049       N/A       N/A
     FSINCOS (PI)   N/A    N/A    1167     4091       N/A       N/A
    FSINCOS (LG2)   N/A    N/A    1525     5640       N/A       N/A
    FSINCOS (L2T)   N/A    N/A    1552     5405       N/A       N/A
      FPTAN (0.0)    41     58      90      752      8381      2324
      FPTAN (1.0)   581    582    1182     6366     10817     29824
       FPTAN (PI)   606    587     292     4388     12410      2300
      FPTAN (LG2)   516    513     883     5939     12502     26770
      FPTAN (L2T)   576    586     954     5723     12483      2301
     FPATAN (0.0)    41     55     123      616      1208     10578
     FPATAN (1.0)   736    736     171     1426     13446     34208
      FPATAN (PI)   206    207   11115     2835     13305     46903
     FPATAN (LG2)   756    736   11077     2490     13319     41312
     FPATAN (L2T)   206    204   11117     2922     13364     50149
      F2XM1 (0.0)    16     56     102      563       723      1722
      F2XM1 (LN2)   631    624     905     4178     11070     33823
      F2XM1 (LG2)   611    585     890     4798     11116     32163
      FYL2X (1.0)    56     57     136      961      1214      4327
       FYL2X (PI)   946    961    1008     8987     12858     40148
      FYL2X (LG2)  1081   1038    1035     8933     12748     46821
      FYL2X (L2T)   926    886    1089     8982     12712     38986
    FYL2XP1 (LG2)  1026   1037    1154    10485     11867     44708


Clock-cycle timings for floating-point operations on Weitek coprocessors
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Weitek 3167 and 4167 coprocessors only implement the basic arithmetic
functions (add, subtract, multiply, divide, square root) in hardware;
transcendental functions are implemented by means of a software library
supplied by Weitek which uses the basic hardware instructions to approximate
the transcendental functions (using polynomial and rational approximations).
The clock cycle timings for the transcendental functions are average values,
since execution time can differ with the value of argument. The speed of
transcendental functions for the 4167 is estimated based on the numbers in
[31,33], from which this timing information has been extracted.


                  Single-precision         Double-precision

                  3167       4167          3167        4167

         ABS         3          2             3           2
         NEG         6          2             6           2
         ADD         6          2             6           2
         SUB         6          2             6           2
         SUBR        6          2             6           2
         MUL         6          2            10           3
         DIVR       38         17            66          31
         SQRT       60         17           118          31
         SIN       146        ~50           292        ~100
         COS       140        ~50           285        ~100
         TAN       188        ~60           340        ~110
         EXP       179        ~60           401        ~130
         LOG       171        ~60           365        ~120
         F->ASCII 1000        N/A          1700         N/A  //
         ASCII->F 1100        N/A          1800         N/A  //

         // rough average of the timings given for different numeric
            formats by Weitek. Note that these conversions routines
            do much more work than the FBLD and FBSTP instructions
            provided by the 80x87 coprocessors. FBLD and FBSTP are
            useful for conversion routines but quite a bit of additional
            code is need for this purpose.



=============================================================================
Accuracy of calculations performed by a coprocessor / The IEEETEST program
=============================================================================

Among the 80x87 coprocessors, the IEEE-754 Standard for Binary Floating-Point
Arithmetic [10,11] was first fully implemented by Intel's 387 coprocessor [17].
Among other things, this means that the add, subtract, multiply, divide,
remainder, and square root operations always deliver the 'exact' result. By
'exact', the standard means that the coprocessor always delivers the machine
number closest to the real result, which may not always be representable
exactly in the available numeric format. The 80387 implements the single,
double, and double extended formats as specified in the IEEE standard, as
well as all functions required by it [17].

Note that earlier Intel coprocessors (the 8087 and the 80287) comply with a
draft version of the standard that differs from the final version. These
chips were developed before IEEE-754 was finally accepted in 1985. As with
the 80387, the basic arithmetic in the 8087 and the 80287 is 'exact' in the
sense that the computed result is always the machine number closest to the
real result. However, there are some differences regarding certain operands
like infinities, and some operations like the remainder are defined
differently than in the final version of the standard.

Some new instructions were introduced with the 80387, most notably the FSIN
and FCOS operations. The argument range for some transcendental function has
also been extended [17]. Note that the IEEE-754 standard says nothing about
the quality of the implementation of transcendental functions like sin, cos,
tan, arctan, log. Intel uses a modified CORDIC [18,19] technique to compute
the transcendental functions; Intel claims that maximum error in the 8087,
80287, and 80387 for all transcendental functions does not exceed two bits in
the mantissa of the double extended format, which features 64 mantissa bits
for an overall accuracy of approximately 19 decimal places [22,23]. This
claim has been independently verified by a competing vendor [13]. This means
that at least 62 of the 64 mantissa bits returned as a result by one of the
transcendental function instructions are guaranteed to be correct.

The Weitek Abacus 3167 and 4167 coprocessors are 'mostly compatible' with
IEEE-754 [31,32,33]. They support the single-precision and double precision
numeric formats described in the standard, as well as the four rounding modes
required by it. However, due to Weitek's desire for extremely high-speed
operation, some of the finer points of IEEE-754 have not been implemented.
One of the most notable omissions is the missing support for denormal
numbers; denormals are always flushed to zero on Weitek chips.

The 387 clone manufacturers all claim 100% compatibility with Intel's 80387,
so one would reasonably expect the same accuracy from their chips as from
Intel's. For example, on the packaging of the IIT 3C87 it states that "...the
requirements of ANSI/IEEE standards are fulfilled and exceeded". Cyrix states
that their 83D87 complies fully with the IEEE-754 standard [12], and in fact
delivers with their coprocessors diagnostic software that includes the
program IEEETEST. This program is based on the IEEE test vectors from the PhD
thesis of Dr. Jerome T. Coonen [9]. A test using the IEEE test vectors has
also been included into the RUNDIAG program on the Intel RapidCAD diagnostic
disk. Rather than performing random tests, the test vectors check specific
cases that may be hard to get right. Each test vector specifies the operation
to be performed, the operands, precision and rounding mode to be used, and
the result (including flags set) to be expected according to the IEEE-754
standard.

I ran IEEETEST on all the available coprocessors/FPUs. The Intel 486, Intel
RapidCAD, Intel 387, Intel 387DX, Cyrix 83D87, and the Cyrix 387+ passed with
no errors. The ULSI 83C87 showed some minor flaws in the FCOM, FDIV, FMUL,
and FSCALE operations, getting flag errors in about 1% of the tested cases,
but no computational errors. However, for the IIT 3C87, the IEEETEST program
showed flag *and* some computational errors (that is, wrong results) for all
tested operations except FXTRACT and FCHS. The Intel 8087 and 80287 show
numerous errors, but this it not surprising, since they do not comply with
IEEE-754 but with an earlier draft of that standard, so they do some things
differently than required by the final version of the standard. In particular
the Intel 8087/80287 do not feature the IEEE-754 compliant comparison (FUCOM)
and remainder (FPREM1) instructions available on the Intel 80387 and newer
coprocessors, so IEEETEST uses the non-compliant FCOM and FPREM instructions
on these processors. Lack of an IEEE-754 compliant comparison instruction also
causes a good deal of the errors in the 'Next After' test.

Since IEEETEST is written in Turbo Pascal, it was recompiled with the $E+
switch to enable use of the coprocessor emulator built into the TP 6.0 library.
Using the emulator, IEEETEST aborted in the following tests with a division
by zero error: 'Comparison', 'Division', 'Next After'. These tests were removed
from the suite and the remaining tests were performed. The public domain
emulator EM87 could be tested, but hung in the last test which checks the
implementation of the remainder operation. This problem occurred because EM87
incorrectly identifies itself as an 387 type coprocessor when run on an 80386.
This causes the 387 specific FUCOM instruction to be used in the 'Comparison'
and 'Next After' tests and the FPREM1 instruction to be used in the 'Remainder'
test. Apparently EM87 is not able to emulate these instructions and therefore
crashes upon trying to execute them. It is interesting to note how the error
profile of EM87 matches exactly that of the Intel 80287, so it can be assumed
that EM87 is a very good emulation of the 80287 when run on the 80286. The
Franke387 V2.4 emulator hangs in the following test performed by IEEETEST:
'Division', 'Multiplication', 'Scalb', 'Remainder'. The cause for these
failures is unknown.


This explanatory text is printed at the start of the IEEETEST program:

     JT Coonen's 1984 UC Berkeley Ph.D. thesis centers around his activities
     as a member of the floating-point working group that defined the IEEE
     754-1985 Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic. Appendix C of
     his thesis presents FPTEST, a Pascal program written by J Thomas and JT
     Coonen. IEEETEST is a port of FPTEST and runs on PCs whose math
     coprocessor accepts 80387-compatible floating-point instructions.

     IEEETEST reads test vectors from the file TESTVECS and compares the
     answer returned by the math coprocessor with the answer listed in the
     test vector. If these answers differ an 'F' is displayed, otherwise a
     '.'is displayed. Answers can differ due to two types of failures:
     numeric failures or flag failures. Numeric failures occur when the
     computed answer has the wrong value. Flag failures occur when the status
     (invalid operation, divide by zero, underflow, overflow, inexact) is
     incorrectly identified.

     TESTVECS is the concatenation of unmodified versions of all the test
     vectors distributed by UC Berkeley. The test data base is copyrighted by
     UC Berkeley (1985) and is being distributed with their permission.
     FPTEST and the test data base can be obtained by asking for 'IEEE-754
     Test Vector' from UC Berkeley, Electrical Engineering and Computer
     Science, Industrial Liaison Program, 479 Corey Hall, Berkeley, CA, 94720
     [phone].

     The initial version of this test data base for the proposed IEEE 754
     binary floating-point standard (draft 8.0) was developed for Zilog, Inc.
     and was donated to the floating-point working group for dissemination.
     Errors in or additions to the distributed data base should be reported
     to the agency of distribution, with copies to Zilog, Inc., 1315 Dell
     Avenue, Campbell, CA, 95008.


IEEETEST output for Intel 80387, Intel 387DX (manufactured 91/49), Intel 486,
C&T 38700 (manufactured 92/19), Cyrix 83D87, Cyrix 387+ (manufactured 92/11),
and Intel RapidCAD (manufactured 92/05):
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

     IEEE-754 Test Vector  Precisions: S=Single D=Double E=Double Extended
                           |     TESTS     | numeric TYPE OF FAILURE flag
            Operation Code | Passed Failed |    S    D    E |   S    D    E
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
       Absolute Value    A |    216      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
             Addition    + |   3528      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
           Comparison    C |   4320      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
            Copy Sign    @ |   1488      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
             Division    / |   4311      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
        Fraction Part    F |    624      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
                 Logb    L |    960      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
       Multiplication    * |   3978      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
             Negation    - |    216      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
           Next After    N |   2832      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
     Round to Integer    I |    558      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
                Scalb    S |    948      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
          Square Root    V |    744      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
          Subtraction    - |   3528      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
            Remainder    % |   2984      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
                    Totals |  31235      0 |


IEEETEST output for ULSI 83C87 (manufactured 91/48):
----------------------------------------------------

     IEEE-754 Test Vector  Precisions: S=Single D=Double E=Double Extended
                           |     TESTS     | numeric TYPE OF FAILURE flag
            Operation Code | Passed Failed |    S    D    E |   S    D    E
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
       Absolute Value    A |    216      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
             Addition    + |   3528      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
           Comparison    C |   4312      8 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    8
            Copy Sign    @ |   1488      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
             Division    / |   4250     61 |    0    0    0 |  28   28    5
        Fraction Part    F |    624      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
                 Logb    L |    960      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
       Multiplication    * |   3936     42 |    0    0    0 |  19   19    4
             Negation    - |    216      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
           Next After    N |   2828      4 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    4
     Round to Integer    I |    558      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
                Scalb    S |    930     18 |    0    0    0 |   6    6    6
          Square Root    V |    744      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
          Subtraction    - |   3528      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
            Remainder    % |   2984      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
                    Totals |  31102    133 |


IEEETEST output for ULSI 83S87 (manufactured 92/17)
(data kindly supplied by Bengt Ask, [e-mail]):
------------------------------------------------------

     IEEE-754 Test Vector  Precisions: S=Single D=Double E=Double Extended
                           |     TESTS     | numeric TYPE OF FAILURE flag
            Operation Code | Passed Failed |    S    D    E |   S    D    E
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
       Absolute Value    A |    216      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
             Addition    + |   3528      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
           Comparison    C |   4320      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
            Copy Sign    @ |   1488      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
             Division    / |   4296     15 |    0    0    0 |   5    5    5
        Fraction Part    F |    624      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
                 Logb    L |    960      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
       Multiplication    * |   3966     12 |    0    0    0 |   4    4    4
             Negation    - |    216      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
           Next After    N |   2828      4 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    4
     Round to Integer    I |    558      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
                Scalb    S |    930     18 |    0    0    0 |   6    6    6
          Square Root    V |    744      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
          Subtraction    - |   3528      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
            Remainder    % |   2984      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
                    Totals |  31102     45 |


IEEETEST output for IIT 3C87 (manufactured 92/20):
--------------------------------------------------

     IEEE-754 Test Vector  Precisions: S=Single D=Double E=Double Extended
                           |     TESTS     | numeric TYPE OF FAILURE flag
            Operation Code | Passed Failed |    S    D    E |   S    D    E
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
       Absolute Value    A |    200     16 |    0    0   16 |   0    0    0
             Addition    + |   3336    192 |    0    0  128 |   0    0   96
           Comparison    C |   4224     96 |    0    0   96 |   0    0    0
            Copy Sign    @ |   1488      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
             Division    / |   4159    152 |    0    0  124 |   0    0  116
        Fraction Part    F |    600     24 |    0    0   24 |   0    0   24
                 Logb    L |    960      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
       Multiplication    * |   3702    276 |    0    0  248 |   0    0  100
             Negation    - |    200     16 |    0    0   16 |   0    0    0
           Next After    N |   2248    584 |    0    0  584 |   0    0  168
     Round to Integer    I |    542     16 |    0    0    4 |   0    0   16
                Scalb    S |    874     74 |    5    5   44 |   8    8   20
          Square Root    V |    688     56 |    0    0   56 |   0    0   56
          Subtraction    - |   3336    192 |    0    0  128 |   0    0   96
            Remainder    % |   2844    140 |    0    0  140 |   0    0  116
                    Totals |  29401   1834 |


IEEETEST output for Intel 80287 run with a 80386 CPU and Intel 8087:
--------------------------------------------------------------------

     IEEE-754 Test Vector  Precisions: S=Single D=Double E=Double Extended
                           |     TESTS     | numeric TYPE OF FAILURE flag
            Operation Code | Passed Failed |    S    D    E |   S    D    E
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
       Absolute Value    A |    216      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
             Addition    + |   2886    642 |   16   16  112 | 174  174  174
           Comparison    C |   3612    708 |  136  136  136 | 228  228  228
            Copy Sign    @ |   1488      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
             Division    / |   3777    534 |   18   18   37 | 169  169  165
        Fraction Part    F |    552     72 |   24   24   24 |  24   24   24
                 Logb    L |    900     60 |   12   12   12 |  20   20   20
       Multiplication    * |   2944   1034 |  105  105  197 | 303  303  231
             Negation    - |    216      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
           Next After    N |    516   2316 |  168  168  332 | 764  764  764
     Round to Integer    I |    546     12 |    0    0    0 |   4    4    4
                Scalb    S |    663    285 |   45   43   26 | 102   98   46
          Square Root    V |    720     24 |    4    4    4 |   8    8    8
          Subtraction    - |   2886    642 |   16   16  112 | 174  174  174
            Remainder    % |   1490   1494 |  432  432  288 | 342  342  230
                    Totals |  23412   7823 |


IEEETEST output for EM87 coprocessor emulator run on an Intel 386 CPU:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

     IEEE-754 Test Vector  Precisions: S=Single D=Double E=Double Extended
                           |     TESTS     | numeric TYPE OF FAILURE flag
            Operation Code | Passed Failed |    S    D    E |   S    D    E
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
       Absolute Value    A |    216      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
             Addition    + |   2886    642 |   16   16  112 | 174  174  174
           Comparison    C |      0   4320 | 1324 1324 1324 |1332 1332 1332
            Copy Sign    @ |   1488      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
             Division    / |   3777    534 |   18   18   37 | 169  169  165
        Fraction Part    F |    552     72 |   24   24   24 |  24   24   24
                 Logb    L |    900     60 |   12   12   12 |  20   20   20
       Multiplication    * |   2944   1034 |  105  105  197 | 303  303  231
             Negation    - |    216      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
           Next After    N |    348   2484 |  768  768  768 | 504  504  526
     Round to Integer    I |    546     12 |    0    0    0 |   4    4    4
                Scalb    S |    663    285 |   45   43   26 | 102   98   46
          Square Root    V |    720     24 |    4    4    4 |   8    8    8
          Subtraction    - |   2886    642 |   16   16  112 | 174  174  174
            Remainder    % |   ######## not run since machine hangs #######


IEEETEST output for Franke387 coprocessor emulator run on an Intel 386:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

     IEEE-754 Test Vector  Precisions: S=Single D=Double E=Double Extended
                           |     TESTS     | numeric TYPE OF FAILURE flag
            Operation Code | Passed Failed |    S    D    E |   S    D    E
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
       Absolute Value    A |    152     64 |    0    0    8 |  24   24    8
             Addition    + |   1587   1941 |  178  178  722 | 508  508  616
           Comparison    C |   3696    624 |  208  208  208 |   4    4  108
            Copy Sign    @ |   1200    288 |    0    0    0 | 144  144    0
             Division    / |   ######## not run since machine hangs #######
        Fraction Part    F |    624      0 |    0    0    0 |   0    0    0
                 Logb    L |    908     52 |    0    0   16 |  16   16    4
       Multiplication    * |   ######## not run since machine hangs #######
             Negation    - |    152     64 |    0    0    8 |  24   24    8
           Next After    N |   1404   1420 |  404  404  596 |  80   80  172
     Round to Integer    I |    514     44 |    4    4   20 |   8    8   16
                Scalb    S |   ######## not run since machine hangs #######
          Square Root    V |    569    175 |   14   31   54 |  28   48   72
          Subtraction    - |   1827   1701 |   98   98  642 | 452  452  576
            Remainder    % |   ######## not run since machine hangs #######


IEEETEST output for Q387 coprocessor emulator run on an Intel 386:
------------------------------------------------------------------

     IEEE-754 Test Vector  Precisions: S=Single D=Double E=Double Extended
                           |     TESTS     | numeric TYPE OF FAILURE flag
            Operation Code | Passed Failed |    S    D    E |   S    D    E
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
       Absolute Value    A |    104    112 |   42   38   16 |  24   24    0
             Addition    + |    911   2617 |  746  637  637 | 672  672  380
           Comparison    C |   3180   1140 |  380  380  380 | 108  108  108
            Copy Sign    @ |    696    792 |  320  280    0 | 288  288    0
             Division    / |    900   3411 |  673  574  814 | 977  977  821
        Fraction Part    F |    348    276 |  154   82   40 |  24   24   24
                 Logb    L |    656    304 |  136  100   36 |  24   24   12
       Multiplication    * |   1023   2955 |  759  663  857 | 670  670  442
             Negation    - |     86    130 |   44   38   32 |  24   24    0
           Next After    N |    464   2368 |  780  780  796 | 344  344  320
     Round to Integer    I |    273    285 |   95   74   52 |  72   72   68
                Scalb    S |    254    694 |  217  192  137 | 176  168  136
          Square Root    V |    128    616 |  192  180  147 | 196  196  188
          Subtraction    - |    911   2617 |  746  637  637 | 672  672  372
            Remainder    % |    558   2426 |  903  859  664 | 508  508  220
                    Totals |  10492  20743 |


IEEETEST output for TP 6.0 coprocessor emulator:
------------------------------------------------

     IEEE-754 Test Vector  Precisions: S=Single D=Double E=Double Extended
                           |     TESTS     | numeric TYPE OF FAILURE flag
            Operation Code | Passed Failed |    S    D    E |   S    D    E
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
       Absolute Value    A |    168     48 |   16   16   16 |  16    8    0
             Addition    + |   1877   1651 |  294  290  336 | 496  456  416
           Comparison    C |   ## not run - program aborts with div-by-0 ##
            Copy Sign    @ |   1392     96 |   48   48    0 |  48    0    0
             Division    / |   ## not run - program aborts with div-by-0 ##
        Fraction Part    F |    588     36 |   12    0   24 |   0    0    0
                 Logb    L |    888     72 |   24   24   24 |  12   12   12
       Multiplication    * |   2148   1830 |  332  310  528 | 520  360  352
             Negation    - |    160     48 |   16   16   16 |  16    8    0
           Next After    N |   ## not run - program aborts with div-by-0 ##
     Round to Integer    I |    318    240 |    0    0    4 |  80   80   80
                Scalb    S |    564    384 |  108  100   76 | 112   88   56
          Square Root    V |    180    564 |  143  157  169 |  72   72  128
          Subtraction    - |   1877   1651 |  294  290  336 | 496  456  416
            Remainder    % |   1072   1912 |  652  672  524 | 336  288  216




Additional accuracy and compatibility tests
-------------------------------------------

To complement the checks done by IEEETEST, I also wrote the short programs
DENORMTS, RCTRL, PCTRL in Turbo Pascal 6.0 that test the following
coprocessor functions:

    1. support for denormals in all precisions (single, double, extended)
    2. support for the four IEEE rounding modes (up, down, nearest, chop)
    3. support for precision control

Note that passing all tests is required for IEEE conformance, as well as 100%
compatibility with Intel's coprocessors. Precision control forces the results
of the FADD, FSUB, FMUL, FDIV, and FSQRT instruction to be rounded to the
specified precision (single, double, double extended). This feature is
provided to obtain compatibility with certain programming languages [17]. By
specifying lower precision, one effectively nullifies the advantages of
extended precision intermediate results.

The IEEE-754 standard for floating-point arithmetic demands that processors
and floating-point packages that can not store the result of operations
*directly* to single and double precision location must provide precision
control. The programs that test precision control and rounding control are
designed to return a different result for each of the modes for the same
sequence of operation.

The source code of the programs can be found in appendix A. The Intel 8087
and 80287 were not tested with DENORMTS since Turbo Pascal does not support
extended precision denormals on 8087/80287 processors, so the denormal test
fails anyway. (The 8087 and 287 pass the RCTRL and PCTRL tests without error,
however).


Test Results for the Intel 387, Intel 387DX, Intel 486, Intel RapidCAD,
Cyrix 83D87, Cyrix 387+, C&T 38700, and the EM87 emulator (on an 80386 system):
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

         Precision Control           SINGLE   1.13311278820037842E+0000
                                     DOUBLE   1.23456789006442125E+0000
                                     EXTENDED 1.23456789012337585E+0000

         Rounding Control            NEAREST -1.23427629010100635E+0100
                                     DOWN    -1.23427623555772409E+0100
                                     UP      -1.23457760966801097E+0100
                                     CHOP    -1.23397493540770643E+0100

         Denormal support

         SINGLE denormals supported
         SINGLE denormal prints as:    4.60943116855005E-0041
         Denormal should be printed as 4.60943...E-0041

         DOUBLE denormals supported
         DOUBLE denormal prints as:    8.75000000000016E-0311
         Denormal should be printed as 8.75...E-0311

         EXTENDED denormals supported
         EXTENDED denormal prints as:  1.31640625000000E-4934
         Denormal should be printed as 1.3164...E-4934


Results for the ULSI 83C87:
---------------------------

         Precision Control           SINGLE   1.23456789012337585E+0000
                                     DOUBLE   1.23456789012337585E+0000
                                     EXTENDED 1.23456789012337585E+0000

         Rounding Control            NEAREST -1.23427629010100635E+0100
                                     DOWN    -1.23427623555772409E+0100
                                     UP      -1.23457760966801097E+0100
                                     CHOP    -1.23397493540770643E+0100

         Denormal support

         SINGLE denormals supported
         SINGLE denormal prints as:    4.60943116855005E-0041
         Denormal should be printed as 4.60943...E-0041

         DOUBLE denormals supported
         DOUBLE denormal prints as:    8.75000000000016E-0311
         Denormal should be printed as 8.75...E-0311

         EXTENDED denormals supported
         EXTENDED denormal prints as:  1.31640625000000E-4934
         Denormal should be printed as 1.3164...E-4934


Results for the IIT 3C87:
-------------------------

         Precision Control           SINGLE   1.13311278820037842E+0000
                                     DOUBLE   1.23456789006442125E+0000
                                     EXTENDED 1.23456789012337585E+0000

         Rounding Control            NEAREST -1.23427629010100635E+0100
                                     DOWN    -1.23427623555772409E+0100
                                     UP      -1.23457760966801097E+0100
                                     CHOP    -1.23397493540770643E+0100

         Denormal support

         SINGLE denormals supported
         SINGLE denormal prints as:    4.60943116855005E-0041
         Denormal should be printed as 4.60943...E-0041

         DOUBLE denormals supported
         DOUBLE denormal prints as:    8.75000000000016E-0311
         Denormal should be printed as 8.75...E-0311

         EXTENDED denormals not supported


Results for the Turbo Pascal 6.0 coprocessor emulator:
------------------------------------------------------

         Precision Control           SINGLE   1.23456789012351396E+0000
                                     DOUBLE   1.23456789012351396E+0000
                                     EXTENDED 1.23456789012351396E+0000

         Rounding Control            NEAREST -1.23457766383395931E+0100
                                     DOWN    -1.23457766383395931E+0100
                                     UP      -1.23457766383395931E+0100
                                     CHOP    -1.23457766383395931E+0100

         Denormal support

         SINGLE denormals not supported
         DOUBLE denormals not supported
         EXTENDED denormals not supported


Results for the Q387 coprocessor emulator:
------------------------------------------

         Precision Control           SINGLE   1.23456789012337614E+0000
                                     DOUBLE   1.23456789012337614E+0000
                                     EXTENDED 1.23456789012337614E+0000

         Rounding Control            NEAREST -1.23427621117212139E+0100
                                     DOWN    -1.23427621117212139E+0100
                                     UP      -1.23427621117212139E+0100
                                     CHOP    -1.23427621117212139E+0100

         Denormal support

         SINGLE denormals not supported
         DOUBLE denormals not supported
         EXTENDED denormals not supported


The test results show that the IIT 3C87 does not conform to the IEEE-754
floating-point standard in that it does not support denormals in double
extended precision. The ULSI 83C87 does not conform to that standard in that
it does not support precision control, but uses double extended precision for
all operations. The TP 6.0 emulator supports neither precision control,
rounding control nor support for any denormals, as does the Q387 emulator.
In addition, their basic arithmetic operations do not seem to conform to
the IEEE standard as the results of the test programs differ from that of
any result computed by a coprocessor for any mode.



================================================
Accuracy of transcendental function calculations
================================================

With regard to the accuracy of transcendental functions, Cyrix claims that
the relative error of the transcendental functions on its 83D87 coprocessor
never exceeds 0.5 ULP of the double extended format [13] (ULP = Unit in the
Last Place, numeric weight of the least significant mantissa bit). This means
that the maximum relative error is below 2**-64, while Intel's published
error limit for the 80387 is 2**-62. While Intel uses a modified CORDIC
algorithm [18,19] to compute the transcendental functions, Cyrix uses
rational approximations that utilize their chip's very fast array multiplier.
(For an explanation why this approach is superior to CORDIC with today's
technology, see [61].) Also, Cyrix uses an internal 75 bit data path for the
mantissa [15], so intermediate computations in the generation of
transcendental function values will enjoy some additional accuracy over the
64 bits provided by the double extended format. Using 75 mantissa bits also
provides an advantage over other coprocessors like the Intel 387DX and ULSI
83C87 which use only a 68 bit mantissa data path [58,59].

Note that a maximum relative error of 0.5 ULP for the Cyrix coprocessor does
not mean that it returns the 'exact' result (machine number closest to
infinitely precise result) all the time. Consider the case where the
infinitely precise result of a transcendental function falls nearly halfway
between two machine numbers. A relative error of 0.5 ULP can cause the result
to be either of the numbers after rounding, depending on the direction of the
error. But the 83D87 should deliver results that never differ from the
'exact' result by more than one ULP. Also note that the claim of relative
error being below 0.5 ULPs is slightly exaggerated; 0.6 ULPs would be a more
realistic error limit. Imagine that the infinitely precise result for some
argument to a transcendental was xxx..xxx1001... (where the xxx...xxx
represent the first 64 bits of the result), but that the coprocessor computes
the result as xxx..xxx0111 and then round this down to xxx..xxx0000. Then the
relative error is (1001b-0b)/1000b = 0.5625 ULPs.

I tested some of the transcendental functions of the Cyrix 387+ and found the
relative error to be always below 0.6 ULPs. Cyrix also claims that its
transcendental functions satisfy the monotonicity criterion [13], a claim not
made by any of the competitors, which does not mean that the transcendental
functions on the other 387-compatibles may not be monotonic, too.
Monotonicity means that for all x1 > x2, it always follows that f(x1) >=
f(x2) for an increasing function like sin on [0..pi/4]. Likewise, for a
decreasing function like cos on [0..pi/4], for all x1 > x2, it follows that
f(x1) <= f(x2).

As previously noted, the Weitek Abacus 3167 and 4167 coprocessors implement
only the basic arithmetic operations (add, subtract, negate, multiply,
divide, square root) in hardware. Transcendental functions are performed via
a software library provided by Weitek. For these library functions Weitek
claims a maximum relative error of 5 ULPs [31,33]. This means that the last
three bits in the mantissa of a double-precision result can be wrong. Note
that the Intel 387 and compatible math coprocessors generate the
transcendental functions with a small relative error with regard to the
*extended double precision* format. Thus, when rounded to double-precision,
their function values are nearly always 'exact'. The problem of 'double
rounding' prevents them to be 'exact' in 100% of all cases. 387 type
coprocessors in general have superior accuracy when compared with Weitek's
coprocesssors.

The test diskette distributed with early versions of the Cyrix 83D87
contained a program (TRANCK) that checks the accuracy of the transcendental
functions in the coprocessor against a more precise software arithmetic [16].
I used this program to compare the accuracy of the transcendental functions
on those 287/387/486 coprocessors/FPUs available to me. As TRANCK will not
accept negative numbers as interval limits, I tested each function on an
interval along the positive x-axis. The functions tested were F2XM1 (2**x-1),
FSIN (sine), FCOS (cosine), FPTAN (tangent), FPATAN (arctangent), FYL2X (y *
log2 (x)), and FYL2XP1 (y * log2 (x+1)). These are all the transcendental
functions implemented on the 80387. Note that the square root (FSQRT) is
*not* a transcendental function. For each function, 100,000 arguments were
evaluated, with the arguments uniformly distributed within the interval
tested.

The EM87 emulator could not be checked with TRANCK, since the multiple
precision package in TRANCK would always return with an error message
immediately. However, the Franke387 emulator could be tested.


In the test results below, the following statistics are detailed:

       %wrong      is the percentage of results that differ from the 'exact'
                   result (infinitely precise result rounded to 64 bits)
       ULP_hi      is the number of results where the returned result was
                   greater than the 'exact' (correctly rounded) result by
                   one ULP (the numeric weight of the last mantissa bit,
                   2**-63 to 2**-64 depending of the size of the number).
       ULPs_hi     is the number of results where the returned result was
                   greater than the 'exact' result by two or more ULPs.
       ULP_lo      is the number of results where the returned result was
                   smaller than the 'exact' (correctly rounded) result by
                   one ULP (the numeric weight of the last mantissa bit,
                   2**-63 to 2**-64 depending of the size of the number).
       ULPs_lo     is the number of results where the returned result was
                   smaller than the 'exact' result by two or more ULPs.
       max ULP err is the maximum deviation of a returned result from the
                   'exact' answer expressed in ULPs.

Test results for accuracy of transcendental functions for double extended
precision as returned by the program TRANCK. 100,000 trials per function:

         Franke387 V2.4 emulator
                                                                    max
         funct. interval   %wrong ULP_hi ULPs_hi ULP_lo ULPs_lo ULP err

         SIN    0,pi/4      39.042  25301     708  13029       4       2
         COS    0,pi/4      75.714  49827   25887      0       0       3
         TAN    0,pi/4      76.976  14230   10029  24323   28394       9
         ATAN   0,1         55.826  26028    1529  24044    4225       4
         2XM1   0,0.5       96.717      0       0  47910   48807       5
         YL2XP1 0,sqrt(2)-1 93.007    578       9  27416   65004       8
         YL2X   0.1,10      62.252  16817    4712  37082    3641    2953


         Microsoft's coprocessor emulator
         (part of MS-C and MS-Fortran libraries)
                                                                     max
         funct. interval    %wrong ULP_hi ULPs_hi ULP_lo ULPs_lo ULP err

         SIN    0,pi/4         N/A    N/A     N/A    N/A     N/A     N/A
         COS    0,pi/4         N/A    N/A     N/A    N/A     N/A     N/A
         TAN    0,pi/4      40.828  27764    1520  11445      99       2
         ATAN   0,1         32.307  18893     485  12530     299       2
         2XM1   0,0.5       52.163   8585     189  37745    5644       3
         YL2XP1 0,sqrt(2)-1 88.801   4714     916  14239   68932      11
         YL2X   0.1,10      36.598  13813    3272  13866    5647      11


         INTEL 8087, 80287
                                                                     max
         funct. interval    %wrong ULP_hi ULPs_hi ULP_lo ULPs_lo ULP err

         SIN    0,pi/4         N/A    N/A     N/A    N/A     N/A     N/A
         COS    0,pi/4         N/A    N/A     N/A    N/A     N/A     N/A
         TAN    0,pi/4      37.001  18756     524  17405     316       2
         ATAN   0,1          9.666   6065       0   3601       0       1
         2XM1   0,0.5       19.920      0       0  19920       0       1
         YL2XP1 0,sqrt(2)-1  7.780    868       0   6912       0       1
         YL2X   0.1,10       1.287    723       0    564       0       1


         INTEL 80387
                                                                     max
         funct. interval    %wrong ULP_hi ULPs_hi ULP_lo ULPs_lo ULP err

         SIN    0,pi/4      28.872   2467       0  26392      13       2
         COS    0,pi/4      27.213  27169      35      9       0       2
         TAN    0,pi/4      10.532    441       0  10091       0       1
         ATAN   0,1          7.088   2386       0   4691       1       2
         2XM1   0,0.5       32.024      0       0  32024       0       1
         YL2XP1 0,sqrt(2)-1 22.611   3461       0  19150       0       1
         YL2X   0.1,10      13.020   6508       0   6512       0       1


         INTEL 387DX
                                                                     max
         funct. interval    %wrong ULP_hi ULPs_hi ULP_lo ULPs_lo ULP err

         SIN    0,pi/4      28.873   2467       0  26393      13       2
         COS    0,pi/4      27.121  27090      22      9       0       2
         TAN    0,pi/4      10.711    457       0  10254       0       1
         ATAN   0,1          7.088   2386       0   4691       1       2
         2XM1   0,0.5       32.024      0       0  32024       0       1
         YL2XP1 0,sqrt(2)-1 22.611   3461       0  19150       0       1
         YL2X   0.1,10      13.020   6508       0   6512       0       1


         ULSI 83C87
                                                                     max
         funct. interval    %wrong ULP_hi ULPs_hi ULP_lo ULPs_lo ULP err

         SIN    0,pi/4      35.530   4989       6  30238     297       2
         COS    0,pi/4      43.989  11193     675  31393     728       2
         TAN    0,pi/4      48.539  18880    1015  26349    2295       3
         ATAN   0,1         20.858     62       0  20796       0       1
         2XM1   0,0.5       21.257      4       0  21253       0       1
         YL2XP1 0,sqrt(2)-1 27.893   9446       0  18213     234       2
         YL2X   0.1,10      13.603   9816       0   3787       0       1


         IIT 3C87
                                                                     max
         funct. interval    %wrong ULP_hi ULPs_hi ULP_lo ULPs_lo ULP err

         SIN    0,pi/4      18.650  11171      0    7479       0       1
         COS    0,pi/4       7.700   3024      0    4676       0       1
         TAN    0,pi/4      20.973   9681      0   11291       1       2
         ATAN   0,1         19.280  13186      0    6094       0       1
         2XM1   0,0.5       25.660  17570      0    8090       0       1
         YL2XP1 0,sqrt(2)-1 45.830  23503   1896   19654     777       3
         YL2X   0.1,10      10.888   5638    357    4845      48       3


         C&T 38700DX
                                                                     max
         funct. interval    %wrong ULP_hi ULPs_hi ULP_lo ULPs_lo ULP err

         SIN    0,pi/4       1.821   1272      0     549       0       1
         COS    0,pi/4      23.358  12458      0   10901       0       1
         TAN    0,pi/4      17.178  10725      0    6453       0       1
         ATAN   0,1          9.359   7082      0    2277       0       1
         2XM1   0,0.5       15.188   3039      0   12149       0       1
         YL2XP1 0,sqrt(2)-1 19.497  12109      0    7388       0       1
         YL2X   0.1,10      46.868    261      0   46607       0       1


         CYRIX 83D87
                                                                     max
         funct. interval    %wrong ULP_hi ULPs_hi ULP_lo ULPs_lo ULP err

         SIN    0,pi/4       1.554   1015      0     539       0       1
         COS    0,pi/4       0.925    143      0     782       0       1
         TAN    0,pi/4       4.147    881      0    3266       0       1
         ATAN   0,1          0.656    229      0     427       0       1
         2XM1   0,0.5        2.628   1433      0    1194       0       1
         YL2XP1 0,sqrt(2)-1  3.242    825      0    2417       0       1
         YL2X   0.1,10       0.931    256      0     675       0       1

         CYRIX 387+
                                                                 max
         funct. interval    %wrong ULP_hi ULPs_hi ULP_lo ULPs_lo ULP err

         SIN    0,pi/4       1.486    864       0    622       0       1
         COS    0,pi/4       2.072     12       0   2060       0       1
         TAN    0,pi/4       0.602     63       0    539       0       1
         ATAN   0,1          0.384     12       0    372       0       1
         2XM1   0,0.5        1.985     27       0   1958       0       1
         YL2XP1 0,sqrt(2)-1  3.662   1705       0   1957       0       1
         YL2X   0.1,10       0.764    367       0    397       0       1


         INTEL RapidCAD, Intel 486
                                                                 max
         funct. interval    %wrong ULP_hi ULPs_hi ULP_lo ULPs_lo ULP err

         SIN    0,pi/4      16.991   1517       0  15474       0       1
         COS    0,pi/4       9.003   7603       0   1400       0       1
         TAN    0,pi/4      10.532    441       0  10091       0       1
         ATAN   0,1          7.078   2386       0   4691       1       2
         2XM1   0,0.5       32.025      0       0  32025       0       1
         YL2XP1 0,sqrt(2)-1 21.800    533       0  21267       0       1
         YL2X   0.1,10       3.894   1879       0   2015       0       1


Discussion of the transcendental function tests
-----------------------------------------------

The test results above indicate that all 80x87 compatibles do not exceed
Intel's stated error bound of 3 ULPs for the transcendental functions.
However, some coprocessors are more accurate than others. Rating the
coprocessors according to the accuracy of their transcendental functions
gives the following list (highest accuracy first): Cyrix 387+, Cyrix 83D87,
Intel 486, Intel RapidCAD, Intel 80287(!), C&T 38700DX, Intel 387DX, Intel
80387, IIT 3C87, ULSI 83C87. The tests also show that the problems with
excessive inaccuracy of the transcendental functions in early versions of the
IIT coprocessors with errors of up to 8 ULPs [8] have been corrected.
(According to [56], certain problems with the FPATAN instruction on the IIT
3C87 occurring under the UNIX version of AutoCAD were corrected in June,
1990.)

Considering the coprocessor emulators, the Franke387 has acceptable accuracy
for the FSIN, FCOS, and FPATAN instructions, taking into consideration that
according to its documentation, Franke387 uses only 64 bits of precision for
the intermediate results, while coprocessors typically use 68 bits and more.
However, the larger error in the FPTAN, F2XM1, FYL2XP1, and especially the
FYL2X operations show that the emulator doesn't use state-of-the-art
algorithms, which ensure an error of only a very few ULPs even if no extra
precise intermediate results are available. Microsoft's emulator, meanwhile,
provides transcendental functions with rather good accuracy, except for the
logarithmic operations, which contain some minor flaws. The Q387 emulator,
which came out only recently and is the fastest emulator available, could
unfortunately not be tested since it caused TRANCK to abort with a GP (general
protection) fault for every input that I tried.



======================================================
Intel 387DX compatibility testing / The SMDIAG program
======================================================

Chips and Technologies has included the program SMDIAG on the V1.0 diagnostic
disk distributed with its SuperMATH 38700DX coprocessor. Its stated purpose
is to test the compatibility of the computational results and flag settings
returned by the C&T coprocessor with the Intel 387DX. However, the tests for
the transcendental functions seem to have been tweaked to let the C&T 38700DX
pass, while coprocessors like the Intel RapidCAD and the Cyrix 83D87 fail.
Also, SMDIAG shows failure in the FSCALE test for the Intel RapidCAD, Cyrix
83D87, Cyrix 387+, and ULSI 83C87, even though they return the correct result
according to Intel's documentation for the Intel 387DX (Intel's second
generation 387), which is indeed returned by the 387DX. (SMDIAG apparently
expects the result returned by the original Intel 80387.)

Note that chip manufacturers often do quite bug fixes, so it wouldn't be
surprising if somebody else, using different runs of the same manufacturer's
chip, came up with different results than the ones below. The Intel 387 alone
seems to have been produced in four different versions that can be told apart
by software, and Cyrix, ULSI, and IIT have manufactured at least two versions
each of their coprocessors. (The coprocessors I tested have the following
manufacturing dates stamped on them. Intel 387DX: 91/49, C&T 38700DX: 92/19,
Cyrix 387+: 92/11, Intel RapidCAD: 92/05, ULSI 83C87: 91/48, IIT 3C87:
92/20.)

       Results of running the SMDIAG program on 387-compatible coprocessors
       (p = passed, f = failed)

                      Intel Intel Intel Cyrix Cyrix   IIT  ULSI   C&T
       Test        RapidCAD 387DX 80387  387+ 83D87  3C87 83C87 38700

       1  (fstore)        f     p     p     p     f     f     f     p ##,%%
       2  (fiall)         p     p     p     p     p     p     f     p
       3  (faddsub)       p     p     p     p     p     p     p     p
       4  (faddsub_nr)    p     p     p     p     f     f     f     p %%
       5  (faddsub_cp)    p     p     p     p     f     f     f     p %%
       6  (faddsub_dn)    p     p     p     p     f     f     f     p %%
       7  (faddsub_up)    p     p     p     p     f     f     f     p %%,&&
       8  (fmul)          p     p     p     p     p     f     f     p
       9  (fdivn)         p     p     p     p     p     p     p     p
       10 (fdiv)          p     p     p     p     p     p     f     p
       11 (fxch)          p     p     p     p     p     p     p     p
       12 (fyl2x)         p     p     p     f     f     f     f     p ++
       13 (fyl2xp1)       f     p     p     f     f     f     f     p ++
       14 (fsqrt)         p     p     p     p     p     p     p     p
       15 (fsincos)       f     p     p     f     f     f     f     p ++
       16 (fptan)         p     p     p     f     p     f     f     p ++
       17 (fpatan)        p     p     p     f     f     f     f     p ++
       18 (f2xm1)         p     p     p     f     f     f     f     p ++
       19 (fscale)        f     f     p     f     f     f     f     p **
       20 (fcom1)         p     p     p     p     p     f     f     p
       21 (fprem)         p     p     p     p     p     p     p     p
       22 (misc1)         p     p     p     p     p     f     f     p
       23 (misc3)         p     p     p     p     p     p     p     p
       24 (misc4)         p     p     p     p     f     f     p     p %%

       failed modules:    4     1     0     7    12    16    17     0


       ## the failure of the Intel RapidCAD is caused by the fact that
          it stores the value of BCD INDEFINITE differently from the
          Intel 387DX. It uses FFFFC000000000000000, while the 387DX uses
          FFFF8000000000000000. However, both encodings are valid according
          to Intel's documentation, which defines the BCD INDEFINITE as
          FFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU, where U is undefined. So failure of the
          RapidCAD to deliver the same answer as the 387DX is not an
          "error", just a very slight incompatibility.
       ** the FSCALE errors reported for the Intel 387DX, Intel RapidCAD,
          Cyrix 83D87, Cyrix 387+, and ULSI 83C87 are due to a single
          'wrong' result each returned by one of the FSCALE computations.
          SMDIAG expects the result returned by the first generation
          Intel 80387 (and, of course, the C&T 38700DX). However, this
          result is wrong according to Intel's documentation and the
          behavior was corrected in the second generation Intel 387DX.
          Therefore, the Intel RapidCAD, Cyrix 83D87, Cyrix 387+, and ULSI
          83C87 return the correct result compatible with the Intel 387DX.
       %% Failures reported for the Cyrix 83D87 are due to the fact that it
          converts pseudodenormals contained in its registers to normalized
          numbers upon storing them to memory with the FSTP TBYTE PTR
          instruction. Intel's processors store pseudodenormals without
          'normalizing' them. This is an incompatibility, but not an error,
          because both encodings will evaluate to the same value should
          they be reused in a calculation.
       && Two of the failures reported for the Cyrix 83D87 are actual
          errors where the Cyrix 83D87 fails to deliver the correct result.
          1) control word = 0A7F (closure=proj., round=up, precision=53bit)
             ST(0) = 0001 ABCEF9876542101
             ST(1) = 0001 800000000345FFF
             instruction: FSUBRP ST(1), ST
             result should be: 0000 2BCEF987650EC800, status word = 3A30
             83D87 returns:    0000 3BCEF987650EC000, status word = 3830
          2) control word = 0A7F (closure=proj., round=up, precision=53bit)
             ST(0) = 0001 ABCEF9876542101
             ST(1) = 0001 800000000000000
             instruction: FSUB ST, ST(1)
             result should be: 0000 2BCEF98765432800, status word = 3A30
             83D87 returns:    0000 3BCEF98765432000, status word = 3830
       ++ The failures for the test of transcendental functions are caused
          by the tested coprocessor returning results that differ from the
          ones returned by the Intel 387DX. On the Cyrix 83D87, Cyrix 387+,
          and Intel RapidCAD, this is simply due to the improved accuracy
          these coprocessors provide over the Intel 387DX. The failures of
          the IIT 3C87 and ULSI 83C87 are mainly due to the lesser accuracy
          in the transcendental functions of these coprocessors, but for
          the IIT 3C87 an additional source of failures is its inability to
          handle extended-precision denormals.


Another compatibility issue that has been discussed on Usenet is the behavior
of the math coprocessors under protected-mode operating systems. I have seen
postings claiming that coprocessors from ULSI, IIT, and Cyrix locked up the
machine when a protected mode operating system (several UNIX derivatives were
also mentioned) was run on them. However, there have also been reports that
several 486-based systems also have this problem, while others do not.
Therefore, I think most of these problems are caused by poor motherboard
design, especially wrong handling of error interrupts coming from the
coprocessor. There could also be bugs in the exception handlers of the
operating system.



==========
References
==========

[1]  Schnurer, G.: Zahlenknacker im Vormarsch. c't 1992, Heft 4, Seiten 170-
     186

[2]  Curnow, H.J.; Wichmann, B.A.: A synthetic benchmark. Computer Journal,
     Vol. 19, No. 1, 1976, pp. 43-49

[3]  Wichmann, B.A.: Validation code for the Whetstone benchmark. NPL Report
     DITC 107/88, National Physics Laboratory, UK, March 1988

[4]  Curnow, H.J.: Wither Whetstone? The Synthetic Benchmark after 15 Years.
     In: Aad van der Steen (ed.): Evaluating Supercomputers. London: Chapman
     and Hall 1990

[5]  Dongarra, J.J.: The Linpack Benchmark: An Explanation. In: Aad van der
     Steen (ed.): Evaluating Supercomputers. London: Chapman and Hall 1990
[6]  Dongarra, J.J.: Performance of Various Computers Using Standard Linear
     Equations Software. Report CS-89-85, Computer Science Department,
     University of Tennessee, March 11, 1992

[7]  Huth, N.: Dichtung und Wahrheit oder Datenblatt und Test. Design &
     Elektronik 1990, Heft 13, Seiten 105-110

[8]  Ungerer, B.: Sockelfolger. c't 1990, Heft 4, Seiten 162-163

[9]  Coonen, J.T.: Contributions to a Proposed Standard for Binary Floating-
     Point Arithmetic Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 1984

[10] IEEE: IEEE Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic. SIGPLAN
     Notices, Vol. 22, No. 2, 1985, pp. 9-25

[11] IEEE Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic. ANSI/IEEE Std 754-
     1985. New York, NY: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
     1985

[12] FasMath 83D87 Compatibility Report. Cyrix Corporation, Nov. 1989 Order
     No. B2004

[13] FasMath 83D87 Accuracy Report. Cyrix Corporation, July 1990 Order No.
     B2002

[14] FasMath 83D87 Benchmark Report. Cyrix Corporation, June 1990 Order No.
     B2004

[15] FasMath 83D87 User's Manual. Cyrix Corporation, June 1990 Order No.
     L2001-003

[16] Brent, R.P.: A FORTRAN multiple-precision arithmetic package. ACM
     Transactions on Mathematical Software, Vol. 4, No. 1, March 1978, pp.
     57-70

[17] 387DX User's Manual, Programmer's Reference. Intel Corporation, 1989
     Order No. 231917-002

[18] Volder, J.E.: The CORDIC Trigonometric Computing Technique. IRE
     Transactions on Electronic Computers, Vol. EC-8, No. 5, September 1959,
     pp. 330-334

[19] Walther, J.S.: A unified algorithm for elementary functions. AFIPS
     Conference Proceedings, Vol. 38, SJCC 1971, pp. 379-385

[20] Esser, R.; Kremer, F.; Schmidt, W.G.: Testrechnungen auf der IBM 3090E
     mit Vektoreinrichtung. Arbeitsbericht RRZK-8803, Regionales
     Rechenzentrum an der Universit"at zu Köln, Februar 1988

[21] McMahon, H.H.: The Livermore Fortran Kernels: A test of the numerical
     performance range. Technical Report UCRL-53745, Lawrence Livermore
     National Laboratory, USA, December 1986

[22] Nave, R.: Implementation of Transcendental Functions on a Numerics
     Processor. Microprocessing and Microprogramming, Vol. 11, No. 3-4,
     March-April 1983, pp. 221-225

[23] Yuen, A.K.: Intel's Floating-Point Processors. Electro/88 Conference
     Record, Boston, MA, USA, 10-12 May 1988, pp. 48/5-1 - 48/5-7

[24] Stiller, A.; Ungerer, B.: Ausgerechnet. c't 1990, Heft 1, Seiten 90-92

[25] Rosch, W.L.: Handfeste Hilfe oder Seifenblase? PC Professionell, Juni
     1991, Seiten 214-237
[26] Intel 80286 Hardware Reference Manual. Intel Corporation, 1987 Order
     No.210760-002

[27] AMD 80C287 80-bit CMOS Numeric Processor. Advanced Micro Devices, June
     1989 Order No. 11671B/0

[28] Intel RapidCAD(tm) Engineering CoProcessor Performance Brief. Intel
     Corporation, 1992

[29] i486(tm) Microprocessor Performance Report. Intel Corporation, April
     1990 Order No. 240734-001

[30] Intel486(tm) DX2 Microprocessor Performance Brief. Intel Corporation,
     March 1992 Order No. 241254-001

[31] Abacus 3167 Floating-Point Coprocessor Data Book. Weitek Corporation,
     July 1990 DOC No. 9030

[32] WTL 4167 Floating-Point Coprocessor Data Book. Weitek Corporation, July
     1989 DOC No. 8943

[33] Abacus Software Designer's Guide. Weitek Corporation, September 1989 DOC
     No. 8967

[34] Stiller, A.: Cache & Carry. c't 1992, Heft 6, Seiten 118-130

[35] Stiller, A.: Cache & Carry, Teil 2. c't 1992, Heft 7, Seiten 28-34

[36] Palmer, J.F.; Morse, S.P.: Die mathematischen Grundlagen der Numerik-
     Prozessoren 8087/80287. München: tewi 1985

[37] 80C187 80-bit Math Coprocessor Data Sheet. Intel Corporation, September
     1989 Order No. 270640-003

[38] IIT-2C87 80-bit Numeric Co-Processor Data Sheet. IIT, May 1990

[39] Engineering note 4x4 matrix multiply transformation. IIT, 1989

[40] Tscheuschner, E.: 4 mal 4 auf einen Streich. c't 1990, Heft 3, Seiten
     266-276

[41] Goldberg, D.: Computer Arithmetic. In: Hennessy, J.L.; Patterson, D.A.:
     Computer Architecture A Quantitative Approach. San Mateo, CA: Morgan
     Kaufmann 1990

[42] 8087 Math Coprocessor Data Sheet. Intel Corporation, October 1989, Order
     No. 205835-007

[43] 8086/8088 User's Manual, Programmer's and Hardware Reference. Intel
     Corporation, 1989 Order No. 240487-001

[44] 80286 and 80287 Programmer's Reference Manual. Intel Corporation, 1987
     Order No. 210498-005

[45] 80287XL/XLT CHMOS III Math Coprocessor Data Sheet. Intel Corporation,
     May 1990 Order No. 290376-001

[46] Cyrix FasMath(tm) 82S87 Coprocessor Data Sheet. Cyrix Coporation, 1991
     Document 94018-00 Rev. 1.0

[47] IIT-3C87 80-bit Numeric Co-Processor Data Sheet. IIT, May 1990

[48] 486(tm)SX(tm) Microprocessor/ 487(tm)SX(tm) Math CoProcessor Data Sheet.
     Intel Corporation, April 1991. Order No. 240950-001

[49] Schnurer, G.: Die gro"se Verlade. c't 1991, Heft 7, Seiten 55-57

[50] Schnurer, G.: Eine 4 f"ur alle. c't 1991, Heft 6, Seite 25

[51] Intel486(tm)DX Microprocessor Data Book. Intel Corporation, June 1991
     Order No. 240440-004

[52] i486(tm) Microprocessor Hardware Reference Manual. Intel Corporation,
     1990 Order No. 240552-001

[53] i486(tm) Microprocessor Programmer's Reference Manual. Intel
     Corporation, 1990 Order No. 240486-001

[54] Ungerer, B.: Kalte H"ute. c't 1992, Heft 8, Seiten 140-144

[55] Ungerer, B.: Hei"se Sache. c't 1991, Heft 4, Seiten 104-108

[56] Rosch, W.L.: Handfeste Hilfe oder Seifenblase? PC Profesionell, Juni
     1991, Seiten 214-237

[57] Niederkr"uger, W.: Lebendige Vergangenheit. c't 1990, Heft 12, Seiten
     114-116

[58] ULSI Math*Co Advanced Math Coprocessor Technical Specification. ULSI
     System, 5/92, Rev. E

[59] 387(tm)DX Math CoProcessor Data Sheet. Intel Corporation, September
     1990. Order No. 240448-003

[60] 387(tm) Numerics Coprocessor Extension Data Sheet. Intel Corporation,
     February 1989. Order No. 231920-005

[61] Koren, I.; Zinaty, O.: Evaluating Elementary Functions in a Numerical
     Coprocessor Based on Rational Approximations. IEEE Transactions on
     Computers, Vol. C-39, No. 8, August 1990, pp. 1030-1037

[62] 387(tm) SX Math CoProcessor Data Sheet. Intel Corporation, November 1989
     Order No. 240225-005

[63] Frenkel, G.: Coprocessors Speed Numeric Operations. PC-Week, August 27,
     1990

[64] Schnurer, G.; Stiller, A.: Auto-Matt. c't 1991, Heft 10, Seiten 94-96

[65] Grehan, R.: FPU Face-Off. Byte, November 1990, pp. 194-200

[66] Tang, P.T.P.: Testing Computer Arithmetic by Elementary Number Theory.
     Preprint MCS-P84-0889, Mathematics and Computer Science Division,
     Argonne National Laboratory, August 1989

[67] Ferguson, W.E.: Selecting math coprocessors. IEEE Spectrum, July 1991,
     pp. 38-41

[68] Schnabel, J.: Viermal 387. Computer Pers"onlich 1991, Heft 22, Seiten
     153-156

[69] Hofmann, J.: Starke Rechenknechte. mc 1990, Heft 7, Seiten 64-67

[70] Woerrlein, H.; Hinnenberg, R.: Die Lust an der Power. Computer Live
     1991, Heft 10, Seiten 138-149

[71] email from Peter Forsberg ([e-mail]), email from Alan Brown
     ([e-mail])

[72] email from Eric Johnson ([e-mail]), email from
     Jerry Whelan ([e-mail]), email from Arto Viitanen
     ([e-mail]), email from Richard Krehbiel ([e-mail])

[73] email from Fred Dunlap (cyrix![e-mail])

[74] correspondence with Bengt Ask ([e-mail])

[75] email from Thomas Hoberg ([e-mail])

[76] Microsoft Macro Assembler Programmer's Guide Version 6.0, Microsoft
     Corporation, 1991. Document No. LN06556-0291

[77] FasMath EMC87 User's Manual, Rev. 2. Cyrix Corporation, February 1991
     Order No. 90018-00

[78] Persson, C.: Die 32-Bit-Parade c't 1992, Heft 9, Seiten 150-156

[79] email from Duncan Murdoch ([e-mail])



========================
Manufacturer's addresses
========================

  Intel Corporation
  3065 Bowers Avenue
  Santa Clara, CA 95051
  USA

  IIT Integrated Information Technology, Inc.
  2540 Mission College Blvd.
  Santa Clara, CA 95054
  USA

  ULSI Systems, Inc.
  58 Daggett Drive
  San Jose, CA 95134
  USA

  Chips & Technologies, Inc.
  3050 Zanker Road
  San Jose, CA 95134
  USA

  Weitek Corporation
  1060 East Arques Avenue
  Sunnyvale, CA 94086
  USA

  AMD Advanced Microdevices, Inc.
  901 Thompson Place
  P.O.B. 3453
  Sunnyvale, CA 94088-3453
  USA

  Cyrix Corporation
  P.O.B. 850118
  Richardson, TX 75085
  USA



===============================
Appendix A: Test program source
===============================

  {$N+,E+}
  PROGRAM PCtrl;

  VAR B,c: EXTENDED;
      Precision, L: WORD;

  PROCEDURE SetPrecisionControl (Precision: WORD);
  (* This procedure sets the internal precision of the NDP. Available *)
  (* precision values:  0  -  24 bits (SINGLE)                        *)
  (*                    1  -  n.a. (mapped to single)                 *)
  (*                    2  -  53 bits (DOUBLE)                        *)
  (*                    3  -  64 bits (EXTENDED)                      *)

  VAR CtrlWord: WORD;

  BEGIN {SetPrecisionCtrl}
     IF Precision = 1 THEN
        Precision := 0;
     Precision := Precision SHL 8; { make mask for PC field in ctrl word}
     ASM
        FSTCW    [CtrlWord]        { store NDP control word }
        MOV      AX, [CtrlWord]    { load control word into CPU }
        AND      AX, 0FCFFh        { mask out precision control field }
        OR       AX, [Precision]   { set desired precision in PC field }
        MOV      [CtrlWord], AX    { store new control word }
        FLDCW    [CtrlWord]        { set new precision control in NDP }
     END;
  END; {SetPrecisionCtrl}

  BEGIN {main}
     FOR Precision := 1 TO 3 DO BEGIN
        B := 1.2345678901234567890;
        SetPrecisionControl (Precision);
        FOR L := 1 TO 20 DO BEGIN
           B := Sqrt (B);
        END;
        FOR L := 1 TO 20 DO BEGIN
           B := B*B;
        END;
        SetPrecisionControl (3);   { full precision for printout }
        WriteLn (Precision, B:28);
     END;
  END.


  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

  {$N+,E+}
  PROGRAM RCtrl;

  VAR B,c: EXTENDED;
      RoundingMode, L: WORD;


  PROCEDURE SetRoundingMode (RCMode: WORD);
  (* This procedure selects one of four available rounding modes *)
  (* 0  -  Round to nearest (default)                            *)
  (* 1  -  Round down (towards negative infinity)                *)
  (* 2  -  Round up (towards positive infinity)                  *)
  (* 3  -  Chop (truncate, round towards zero)                   *)

  VAR CtrlWord: WORD;

  BEGIN
     RCMode := RCMode SHL 10;  { make mask for RC field in control word}
     ASM
        FSTCW    [CtrlWord]        { store NDP control word }
        MOV      AX, [CtrlWord]    { load control word into CPU }
        AND      AX, 0F3FFh        { mask out rounding control field }
        OR       AX, [RCMode]      { set desired precision in RC field }
        MOV      [CtrlWord], AX    { store new control word }
        FLDCW    [CtrlWord]        { set new rounding control in NDP }
     END;
  END;

  BEGIN
     FOR RoundingMode := 0 TO 3 DO BEGIN
        B := 1.2345678901234567890e100;
        SetRoundingMode (RoundingMode);
        FOR L := 1 TO 51 DO BEGIN
           B := Sqrt (B);
        END;
           FOR L := 1 TO 51 DO BEGIN
           B := -B*B;
        END;
        SetRoundingMode (0);        { round to nearest for printout }
        WriteLn (RoundingMode, B:28);
     END;
  END.


  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

  {$N+,E+}

  PROGRAM DenormTs;

  VAR E: EXTENDED;
      D: DOUBLE;
      S: SINGLE;

  BEGIN
     WriteLn ('Testing support and printing of denormals');
     WriteLn;
     Write ('Coprocessor is: ');
     CASE Test8087 OF
        0: WriteLn ('Emulator');
        1: WriteLn ('8087 or compatible');
        2: WriteLn ('80287 or compatible');
        3: WriteLn ('80387 or compatible');
     END;
     WriteLn;
     S := 1.18e-38;
     S := S * 3.90625e-3;
     IF S = 0 THEN
        WriteLn ('SINGLE denormals not supported')
     ELSE BEGIN
        WriteLn ('SINGLE denormals supported');
        WriteLn ('SINGLE denormal prints as:   ', S);
        WriteLn ('Denormal should be printed as 4.60943...E-0041');
     END;
     WriteLn;
     D := 2.24e-308;
     D := D * 3.90625e-3;
     IF D = 0 THEN
        WriteLn ('DOUBLE denormals not supported')
     ELSE BEGIN
        WriteLn ('DOUBLE denormals supported');
        WriteLn ('DOUBLE denormal prints as:   ', D);
        WriteLn ('Denormal should be printed as 8.75...E-0311');
     END;
     WriteLn;
     E := 3.37e-4932;
     E := E * 3.90625e-3;
     IF E = 0 THEN
        WriteLn ('EXTENDED denormals not supported')
     ELSE BEGIN
        WriteLn ('EXTENDED denormals supported');
        WriteLn ('EXTENDED denormal prints as: ', E);
        WriteLn ('Denormal should be printed as 1.3164...E-4934');
     END;
  END.



====================================
Appendix B: Benchmark program source
====================================


  ; FILE: APFELM4.ASM
  ; assemble with MASM /e APFELM4 or TASM /e APFELM4


  CODE        SEGMENT BYTE PUBLIC 'CODE'
              ASSUME  CS: CODE

              PAGE    ,120

              PUBLIC  APPLE87;

  APPLE87     PROC    NEAR
              PUSH    BP                  ; save caller's base pointer
              MOV     BP, SP              ; make new frame pointer
              PUSH    DS                  ; save caller's data segment
              PUSH    SI                  ; save register
              PUSH    DI                  ;  variables
              LDS     BX, [BP+04]         ; pointer to parameter record
              FINIT                       ; init 80x87          FSP->R0
              FILD   WORD  PTR [BX+02]    ; maxrad              FSP->R7
              FLD    QWORD PTR [BX+08]    ; qmax                FSP->R6
              FSUB   QWORD PTR [BX+16]    ; qmax-qmin           FSP->R6
              DEC    WORD  PTR [BX+04]    ; ymax-1
              FIDIV  WORD  PTR [BX+04]    ; (qmax-qmin)/(ymax-1)FSP->R6
              FSTP   QWORD PTR [BX+16]    ; save delta_q        FSP->R7
              FLD    QWORD PTR [BX+24]    ; pmax                FSP->R6
              FSUB   QWORD PTR [BX+32]    ; pmax-pmin           FSP->R6
              DEC    WORD  PTR [BX+06]    ; xmax-1
              FIDIV  WORD  PTR [BX+06]    ; delta_p             FSP->R6
              MOV    AX, [BX]             ; save maxiter,[BX] needed for
              MOV    [BX+2], AX           ;  80x87 status now
              XOR    BP, BP               ; y=0
              FLD    QWORD PTR [BX+08]    ; qmax                FSP->R5
              CMP    WORD  PTR [BX+40], 0 ; fast mode on 8087 desired ?
              JE     yloop                ; no, normal mode
              FSTCW  [BX]                 ; save NDP control word
              AND    WORD PTR [BX], 0FCFFh; set PCTRL = single-precision
              FLDCW  [BX]                 ; get back NDP control word
  yloop:      XOR    DI, DI               ; x=0
              FLD    QWORD PTR [BX+32]    ; pmin                FSP->R4
  xloop:      FLDZ                        ; j**2= 0             FSP->R3
              FLDZ                        ; 2ij = 0             FSP->R2
              FLDZ                        ; i**2= 0             FSP->R1
              MOV    CX, [BX+2]           ; maxiter
              MOV    DL, 41h              ; mask for C0 and C3 cond.bits
  iteration:  FSUB   ST, ST(2)            ; i**2-j**2           FSP->R1
              FADD   ST, ST(3)            ; i**2-j**2+p = i     FSP->R1
              FLD    ST(0)                ; duplicate i         FSP->R0
              FMUL   ST(1), ST            ; i**2                FSP->R0
              FADD   ST, ST(0)            ; 2i                  FSP->R0
              FXCH   ST(2)                ; 2*i*j               FSP->R0
              FADD   ST, ST(5)            ; 2*i*j+q = j         FSP->R0
              FMUL   ST(2), ST            ; 2*i*j               FSP->R0
              FMUL   ST, ST(0)            ; j**2                FSP->R0
              FST    ST(3)                ; save j**2           FSP->R0
              FADD   ST, ST(1)            ; i**2+j**2           FSP->R0
              FCOMP  ST(7)                ; i**2+j**2 > maxrad? FSP->R1
              FSTSW  [BX]                 ; save 80x87 cond.codeFSP->R1
              TEST   BYTE PTR [BX+1], DL  ; test carry and zero flags
              LOOPNZ iteration            ; until maxiter if not diverg.
              MOV    DX, CX               ; number of loops executed
              NEG    CX                   ; carry set if CX <> 0
              ADC    DX, 0                ; adjust DX if no. of loops<>0

              ; plot point here (DI = X, BP = y, DX has the color)

              FSTP   ST(0)                ; pop i**2            FSP->R2
              FSTP   ST(0)                ; pop 2ij             FSP->R3
              FSTP   ST(0)                ; pop j**2            FSP->R4
              FADD   ST,ST(2)             ; p=p+delta_p         FSP->R4
              INC    DI                   ; x:=x+1
              CMP    DI, [BX+6]           ; x > xmax ?
              JBE    xloop                ; no, continue on same line
              FSTP   ST(0)                ; pop p               FSP->R5
              FSUB   QWORD PTR [BX+16]    ; q=q-delta_q         FSP->R5
              INC    BP                   ; y:=y+1
              CMP    BP, [BX+4]           ; y > ymax ?
              JBE    yloop                ; no, picture not done yet

  groesser:   POP    DI                   ; restore
              POP    SI                   ;  register variables
              POP    DS                   ; restore caller's data segm.
              POP    BP                   ; save caller's base pointer
              RET    4                    ; pop parameters and return
  APPLE87     ENDP

  CODE        ENDS

              END

  ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

  UNIT Time;

  INTERFACE

  FUNCTION Clock: LONGINT;          { same as VMS; time in milliseconds }


  IMPLEMENTATION

  FUNCTION Clock: LONGINT; ASSEMBLER;
  ASM
             PUSH    DS            { save caller's data segment }
             XOR     DX, DX        { initialize data segment to }
             MOV     DS, DX        {  access ticker counter }
             MOV     BX, 46Ch      { offset of ticker counter in segm.}
             MOV     DX, 43h       { timer chip control port }
             MOV     AL, 4         { freeze timer 0 }
             PUSHF                 { save caller's int flag setting }
             STI                   { allow update of ticker counter }
             LES     DI, DS:[BX]   { read BIOS ticker counter }
             OUT     DX, AL        { latch timer 0 }
             LDS     SI, DS:[BX]   { read BIOS ticker counter }
             IN      AL, 40h       { read latched timer 0 lo-byte }
             MOV     AH, AL        { save lo-byte }
             IN      AL, 40h       { read latched timer 0 hi-byte }
             POPF                  { restore caller's int flag }
             XCHG    AL, AH        { correct order of hi and lo }
             MOV     CX, ES        { ticker counter 1 in CX:DI:AX }
             CMP     DI, SI        { ticker counter updated ? }
             JE      @no_update    { no }
             OR      AX, AX        { update before timer freeze ? }
             JNS     @no_update    { no }
             MOV     DI, SI        { use second }
             MOV     CX, DS        {  ticker counter }
  @no_update:NOT     AX            { counter counts down }
             MOV     BX, 36EDh     { load multiplier }
             MUL     BX            { W1 * M }
             MOV     SI, DX        { save W1 * M (hi) }
             MOV     AX, BX        { get M }
             MUL     DI            { W2 * M }
             XCHG    BX, AX        { AX = M, BX = W2 * M (lo) }
             MOV     DI, DX        { DI = W2 * M (hi) }
             ADD     BX, SI        { accumulate }
             ADC     DI, 0         {  result }
             XOR     SI, SI        { load zero }
             MUL     CX            { W3 * M }
             ADD     AX, DI        { accumulate }
             ADC     DX, SI        {  result in DX:AX:BX }
             MOV     DH, DL        { move result }
             MOV     DL, AH        {  from DL:AX:BX }
             MOV     AH, AL        {   to }
             MOV     AL, BH        {    DX:AX:BH }
             MOV     DI, DX        { save result }
             MOV     CX, AX        {  in DI:CX }
             MOV     AX, 25110     { calculate correction }
             MUL     DX            {  factor }
             SUB     CX, DX        { subtract correction }
             SBB     DI, SI        {  factor }
             XCHG    AX, CX        { result back }
             MOV     DX, DI        {  to DX:AX }
             POP     DS            { restore caller's data segment }
  END;


  BEGIN
     Port [$43] := $34;           { need rate generator, not square wave}
     Port [$40] := 0;             { generator as prog. by some BIOSes }
     Port [$40] := 0;             { for timer 0 }
  END. { Time }


  ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

  {$A+,B-,R-,I-,V-,N+,E+}
  PROGRAM PeakFlop;

  USES Time;

  TYPE ParamRec = RECORD
                     MaxIter, MaxRad, YMax, XMax: WORD;
                     Qmax, Qmin, Pmax, Pmin: DOUBLE;
                     FastMod: WORD;
                     PlotFkt: POINTER;
                     FLOPS:LONGINT;
                  END;

  VAR Param: ParamRec;
      Start: LONGINT;


  {$L APFELM4.OBJ}

  PROCEDURE Apple87 (VAR Param: ParamRec);     EXTERNAL;


  BEGIN
     WITH Param DO BEGIN
        MaxIter:= 50;
        MaxRad := 30;
        YMax   := 30;
        XMax   := 30;
        Pmin   :=-2.1;
        Pmax   := 1.1;
        Qmin   :=-1.2;
        Qmax   := 1.2;
        FastMod:= Word (FALSE);
        PlotFkt:= NIL;
        Flops  := 0;
     END;
     Start := Clock;
     Apple87 (Param);         { executes 104002 FLOP }
     Start := Clock - Start;  { elapsed time in milliseconds }
     WriteLn ('Peak-MFLOPS: ', 104.002 / Start);
  END.

  ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

  ; FILE: M4X4.ASM
  ;
  ; assemble with TASM /e M4X4 or MASM /e M4X4

  CODE      SEGMENT BYTE PUBLIC 'CODE'

            ASSUME  CS:CODE

            PUBLIC  MUL_4x4
            PUBLIC  IIT_MUL_4x4


  FSBP0     EQU     DB  0DBh, 0E8h        ; declare special IIT
  FSBP1     EQU     DB  0DBh, 0EBh        ;  instructions
  FSBP2     EQU     DB  0DBh, 0EAh
  F4X4      EQU     DB  0DBh, 0F1h


  ;---------------------------------------------------------------------
  ;
  ; MUL_4x4 multiplicates a four-by-four matrix by an array of four
  ; dimensional vectors. This operation is needed for 3D transformations
  ; in graphics data processing. There are arrays for each component of
  ; a vector. Thus there is an ; array containing all the x components,
  ; another containing all the y components and so on. Each component is
  ; an 8 byte IEEE floating-point number. Two indices into the array of
  ; vectors are given. The first is the index of the vector that will be
  ; processed first, the second is the index of the vector processed
  ; last.
  ;
  ;---------------------------------------------------------------------

  MUL_4x4   PROC    NEAR

            AddrX   EQU DWORD PTR [BP+24] ; address of X component array
            AddrY   EQU DWORD PTR [BP+20] ; address of Y component array
            AddrZ   EQU DWORD PTR [BP+16] ; address of Z component array
            AddrW   EQU DWORD PTR [BP+12] ; address of W component array
            AddrT   EQU DWORD PTR [BP+8]  ; addr. of 4x4 transform. mat.
            F       EQU WORD  PTR [BP+6]  ; first vector to process
            K       EQU WORD  PTR [BP+4]  ; last vector to process
            RetAddr EQU WORD  PTR [BP+2]  ; return address saved by call
            SavdBP  EQU WORD  PTR [BP+0]  ; saved frame pointer
            SavdDS  EQU WORD  PTR [BP-2]  ; caller's data segment

            PUSH    BP                    ; save TURBO-Pascal frame ptr
            MOV     BP, SP                ; new frame pointer
            PUSH    DS                    ; save TURBO-Pascal data segmnt

            MOV     CX, K                 ; final index
            SUB     CX, F                 ; final index - start index
            JNC     $ok                   ; must not
            JMP     $nothing              ;  be negative
  $ok:      INC     CX                    ; number of elements

            MOV     SI, F                 ; init offset into arrays
            SHL     SI, 1                 ; each
            SHL     SI, 1                 ;  element
            SHL     SI, 1                 ;   has 8 bytes

            LDS     DI, AddrT             ; addr. of transformation mat.
            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI]        ; load a[0,0]   = R7
            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI+8]      ; load a[0,1]   = R6

  $mat_mul: LES     BX, AddrX             ; addr. of x component array
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[BX+SI]  ; load x[a]     = R5
            LES     BX, AddrY             ; addr. of y component array
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[BX+SI]  ; load y[a]     = R4
            LES     BX, AddrZ             ; addr. of z component array
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[BX+SI]  ; load z[a]     = R3
            LES     BX, AddrW             ; addr. of w component array
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[BX+SI]  ; load w[a]     = R2

            FLD     ST(5)                 ; load a[0,0]   = R1
            FMUL    ST, ST(4)             ; a[0,0] * x[a] = R1
            FLD     ST(5)                 ; load a[0,1]   = R0
            FMUL    ST, ST(4)             ; a[0,1] * y[a] = R0
            FADDP   ST(1), ST             ; a[0,0]*x[a]+a[0,1]*y[a]=R1
            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI+16]     ; load a[0,2]   = R0
            FMUL    ST, ST(3)             ; a[0,2] * z[a] = R0
            FADDP   ST(1), ST             ; a[0,0]*x[a]...a[0,2]*z[a]=R1
            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI+24]     ; load a[0,3]   = R0
            FMUL    ST, ST(2)             ; a[0,3] * w[a] = R0
            FADDP   ST(1), ST             ; a[0,0]*x[a]...a[0,3]*w[a]=R1
            LES     BX, AddrX             ; get address of x vector
            FSTP    QWORD PTR ES:[BX+SI]  ; write new x[a]

            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI+32]     ; load a[1,0]   = R1
            FMUL    ST, ST(4)             ; a[1,0] * x[a] = R1
            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI+40]     ; load a[1,1]   = R0
            FMUL    ST, ST(4)             ; a[1,1] * y[a] = R0
            FADDP   ST(1), ST             ; a[1,0]*x[a]+a[1,1]*y[a]=R1
            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI+48]     ; load a[1,2]   = R0
            FMUL    ST, ST(3)             ; a[1,2] * z[a] = R0
            FADDP   ST(1), ST             ; a[1,0]*x[a]...a[1,2]*z[a]=R1
            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI+56]     ; load a[1,3]   = R0
            FMUL    ST, ST(2)             ; a[1,3] * w[a] = R0
            FADDP   ST(1), ST             ; a[1,0]*x[a]...a[1,3]*w[a]=R1
            LES     BX, AddrY             ; get address of y vector
            FSTP    QWORD PTR ES:[BX+SI]  ; write new y[a]

            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI+64]     ; load a[2,0]   = R1
            FMUL    ST, ST(4)             ; a[2,0] * x[a] = R1
            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI+72]     ; load a[2,1]   = R0
            FMUL    ST, ST(4)             ; a[2,1] * y[a] = R0
            FADDP   ST(1), ST             ; a[2,0]*x[a]+a[2,1]*y[a]=R1
            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI+80]     ; load a[2,2]   = R0
            FMUL    ST, ST(3)             ; a[2,2] * z[a] = R0
            FADDP   ST(1), ST             ; a[2,0]*x[a]...a[2,2]*z[a]=R1
            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI+88]     ; load a[2,3]   = R0
            FMUL    ST, ST(2)             ; a[2,3] * w[a] = R0
            FADDP   ST(1), ST             ; a[2,0]*x[a]...a[2,3]*w[a]=R1
            LES     BX, AddrZ             ; get address of z vector
            FSTP    QWORD PTR ES:[BX+SI]  ; write new z[a]

            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI+96]     ; load a[3,0]   = R1
            FMULP   ST(4), ST             ; a[3,0] * x[a] = R5
            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI+104]    ; load a[3,1]   = R1
            FMULP   ST(3), ST             ; a[3,1] * y[a] = R4
            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI+112]    ; load a[3,2]   = R1
            FMULP   ST(2), ST             ; a[3,2] * z[a] = R3
            FLD     QWORD PTR [DI+120]    ; load a[3,3]   = R1
            FMULP   ST(1), ST             ; a[3,3] * w[a] = R2
            FADDP   ST(1), ST             ; a[3,3]*w[a]+a[3,2]*z[a]=R3
            FADDP   ST(1), ST             ; a[3,3]*w[a]...a[3,1]*y[a]=R4
            FADDP   ST(1), ST             ; a[3,3]*w[a]...a[3,0]*x[a]=R5
            LES     BX, AddrW             ; get address of w vector
            FSTP    QWORD PTR ES:[BX+SI]  ; write new w[a]

            ADD     SI, 8                 ; new offset into arrays
            DEC     CX                    ; decrement element counter
            JZ      $done                 ; no elements left, done
            JMP     $mat_mul              ; transform next vector

  $done:    FSTP     ST(0)                ; clear
            FSTP     ST(0)                ;  FPU stack
  $nothing: POP      DS                   ; restore TP data segment
            POP      BP                   ; restore TP frame pointer
            RET      24                   ; pop parameters and return

  MUL_4X4   ENDP


  ;---------------------------------------------------------------------
  ;
  ; IIT_MUL_4x4 multiplicates a four-by-four matrix by an array of four
  ; dimensional vectors. This operation is needed for 3D transformations
  ; in graphics data processing. There are arrays for each component of
  ; a vector.  Thus there is an array containing all the x components,
  ; another containing all the y components and so on. Each component is
  ; an 8 byte IEEE floating-point number. Two indices into the array of
  ; vectors are given. The first is the index of the vector that will be
  ; processed first, the second is the index of the vector processed
  ; last. This subroutine uses the special instructions only available
  ; on IIT coprocessors to provide fast matrix multiply capabilities.
  ; So make sure to use it only on IIT coprocessors.
  ;
  ;---------------------------------------------------------------------

  IIT_MUL_4x4   PROC    NEAR

            AddrX   EQU DWORD PTR [BP+24] ; address of X component array
            AddrY   EQU DWORD PTR [BP+20] ; address of Y component array
            AddrZ   EQU DWORD PTR [BP+16] ; address of Z component array
            AddrW   EQU DWORD PTR [BP+12] ; address of W component array
            AddrT   EQU DWORD PTR [BP+8]  ; addr. of 4x4 transf. matrix
            F       EQU WORD  PTR [BP+6]  ; first vector to process
            K       EQU WORD  PTR [BP+4]  ; last vector to process
            RetAddr EQU WORD  PTR [BP+2]  ; return address saved by call
            SavdBP  EQU WORD  PTR [BP+0]  ; saved frame pointer
            SavdDS  EQU WORD  PTR [BP-2]  ; caller's data segment
            Ctrl87  EQU WORD  PTR [BP-4]  ; caller's 80x87 control word

            PUSH    BP                    ; save TURBO-Pascal frame ptr
            MOV     BP, SP                ; new frame pointer
            PUSH    DS                    ; save TURBO-Pascal data seg.
            SUB     SP, 2                 ; make local variabe
            FSTCW   [Ctrl87]              ; save 80x87 ctrl word
            LES     SI, AddrT             ; ptr to transformation matrix
            FINIT                         ; initialize coprocessor
            FSBP2                         ; set register bank 2
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI]     ; load a[0,0]
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+32]  ; load a[1,0]
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+64]  ; load a[2,0]
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+96]  ; load a[3,0]
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+8]   ; load a[0,1]
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+40]  ; load a[1,1]
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+72]  ; load a[2,1]
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+104] ; load a[3,1]
            FINIT                         ; initialize coprocessor
            FSBP1                         ; set register bank 1
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+16]  ; load a[0,2]
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+48]  ; load a[1,2]
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+80]  ; load a[2,2]
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+112] ; load a[3,2]
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+24]  ; load a[0,3]
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+56]  ; load a[1,3]
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+88]  ; load a[2,3]
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+120] ; load a[3,3]

                                          ; transformation matrix loaded

            MOV     AX, F                 ; index of first vector
            MOV     DX, K                 ; index of last vector

            MOV     BX, AX                ; index 1st vector to process
            MOV     CL, 3                 ; component has 8 (2**3) bytes
            SHL     BX, CL                ; compute offset into arrays

            FINIT                         ; initialize coprocessor
            FSBP0                         ; set register bank 0

  $mat_loop:LES     SI, AddrW             ; addr. of W component array
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+BX]  ; W component current vector
            LES     SI, AddrZ             ; addr. of Z component array
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+BX]  ; Z component current vector
            LES     SI, AddrY             ; addr. of Y component array
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+BX]  ; Y component current vector
            LES     SI, AddrX             ; addr. of X component array
            FLD     QWORD PTR ES:[SI+BX]  ; X component current vector
            F4X4                          ; mul 4x4 matrix by 4x1 vector
            INC     AX                    ; next vector
            MOV     DI, AX                ; next vector
            SHL     DI, CL                ; offset of vector into arrays

            FSTP    QWORD PTR ES:[SI+BX]  ; store X comp. of curr. vect.
            LES     SI, AddrY             ; address of Y component array
            FSTP    QWORD PTR ES:[SI+BX]  ; store Y comp. of curr. vect.
            LES     SI, AddrZ             ; address of Z component array
            FSTP    QWORD PTR ES:[SI+BX]  ; store Z comp. of curr. vect.
            LES     SI, AddrW             ; address of W component array
            FSTP    QWORD PTR ES:[SI+BX]  ; store W comp. of curr. vect.

            MOV     BX, DI                ; ofs nxt vect. in comp. arrays
            CMP     AX, DX                ; nxt vector past upper bound?
            JLE     $mat_loop             ; no, transform next vector
            FLDCW   [Ctrl87]              ; restore orig 80x87 ctrl word

            ADD      SP, 2                ; get rid of local variable
            POP      DS                   ; restore TP data segment
            POP      BP                   ; restore TP frame pointer
            RET      24                   ; pop parameters and return
  IIT_MUL_4x4   ENDP

  CODE      ENDS

            END

  ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

  {$N+,E+}

  PROGRAM Trnsform;

  USES Time;

  CONST VectorLen = 8190;

  TYPE  Vector    = ARRAY [0..VectorLen] OF DOUBLE;
        VectorPtr = ^Vector;
        Mat4      = ARRAY [1..4, 1..4] OF DOUBLE;

  VAR   X: VectorPtr;
        Y: VectorPtr;
        Z: VectorPtr;
        W: VectorPtr;
        T: Mat4;
        K: INTEGER;
        L: INTEGER;
        First: INTEGER;
        Last:  INTEGER;
        Start: LONGINT;
        Elapsed:LONGINT;

  PROCEDURE MUL_4X4     (X, Y, Z, W: VectorPtr;
                         VAR T: Mat4; First, Last: INTEGER); EXTERNAL;
  PROCEDURE IIT_MUL_4X4 (X, Y, Z, W: VectorPtr;
                         VAR T: Mat4; First, Last: INTEGER); EXTERNAL;

  {$L M4X4.OBJ}

  BEGIN
     WriteLn ('Test8087 = ', Test8087);
     New (X);
     New (Y);
     New (Z);
     New (W);
     FOR L := 1 TO VectorLen DO BEGIN
        X^ [L] := Random;
        Y^ [L] := Random;
        Z^ [L] := Random;
        W^ [L] := Random;
     END;
     X^ [0] := 1;
     Y^ [0] := 1;
     Z^ [0] := 1;
     W^ [0] := 1;
     FOR K := 1 TO 4 DO BEGIN
        FOR L := 1 TO 4 DO BEGIN
           T [K, L] := (K-1)*4 + L;
        END;
     END;
     First := 0;
     Last  := 8190;
     Start := Clock;
     MUL_4X4 (X, Y, Z, W, T, First, Last);
     { IIT_MUL_4X4 (X, Y, Z, W, T, First, Last); }
     Elapsed := Clock - Start;
     WriteLn ('Number of vectors: ', Last-First+1);
     WriteLn ('Time: ', Elapsed, ' ms');
     WriteLn ('Equivalent to ', (28.0*(Last-First+1)/1e6)/
              (Elapsed*1e-3):0:4, ' MFLOPS');
     WriteLn;
     WriteLn ('Last vector:');
     WriteLn;
     WriteLn (X^[Last]);
     WriteLn (Y^[Last]);
     WriteLn (Z^[Last]);
     WriteLn (W^[Last]);
  END