home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.sys.dec:5008 comp.os.vms:15100 comp.unix.ultrix:6936
- Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!ukma!cs.widener.edu!dsinc!ub!niktow!pavlov
- From: pavlov@niktow.canisius.edu (Greg Pavlov)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.dec,comp.os.vms,comp.unix.ultrix
- Subject: Re: Digital News and Review's irresponsible attitude
- Message-ID: <1378@niktow.canisius.edu>
- Date: 15 Sep 92 21:41:31 GMT
- References: <6094@npri6.npri.com> <1309@niktow.canisius.edu> <6136@npri6.npri.com> <6156@npri6.npri.com>
- Followup-To: comp.sys.dec,comp.os.vms,comp.unix.ultrix
- Distribution: world,local
- Organization: Canisius College, Buffalo NY. 14208
- Lines: 47
-
- In article <6156@npri6.npri.com>, richard@npri6.npri.com (Richard Head) writes:
- >
- > DR's "reviews" (and I use the word loosely), are essentially an advertisement.
-
- Advertisement for ?????
-
- > >So? Is it any worse a comparison point than the VAX-11/780?
- >
- > "Worse"? The point is, you academic flunky, that MicroVUPs are MACHINE
- > SPECIFIC. SPECmarks are machine and platform independent. If you think
- > MicroVUPs are so great, why not have MicroVAX3100VUPS? How about
- > VAXstationVUPs?
- >
- How is a SPECmark "machine and platform independent" while MVUPS is "MACHINE
- SPECIFIC" ? How is it different from a MVUP, other than that the
- index for the former is an 11/780 and the index for the latter is a
- uVAX II ? Because "VAX11/780" doesn't appear in the name ???
-
- What is an "academic flunky" ? I haven't spent much time in a university
- in some years, so I am not sure what that term is supposed to mean. Some-
- one less intelligent, discerning, and analytical than .... ?
-
-
- greg pavlov,
- pavlov@fstrf.org
-
-
- "Note that Digital Review gives relative performance using the Micro Vax II
- as a basis for comparison (MVUPS). For consistency with the rest of this
- document, we use the VAX 11/780, which significantly affects the ratios.
- ........
- We applaud DR for several reasons. First, they try to offer some useful
- benchmarks in place of empty mips-ratings, which is more than most magaz-
- ines do. Second, they are willing to listen to input and improve the
- usefulness of their benchmarks."
-
- - "Performance Brief CPU Benchmarks",
- John Mashey, Editor
-
- P.S.:
-
- Our own experience is this: over the past 7 years, we have run three
- major series of benchmarks based on our own applications prior to (for
- us) substantial hardware purchases. We found that, for our applications
- at least, the DR benchmark results always correlated closely with ours,
- in terms of relative performance of the systems we were comparing. All
- the systems we tested were UNIX-based.
-