[RC5] Performance on P-IV

Ferry van Steen td at salesint.com
Fri May 11 11:04:30 EDT 2001

I knew the instructions wouldn't be optimized. However like always I figured backwards compatibility, and this compatibility which at the moment is very important since almost nothing is optimized yet is really really slow 

not really something that will make people buy P-IV's. Then again most people will only look at MHz's and will be very dissapointed (for now) if they'd upgrade their P-III 800 at 133 to a P-IV since they won't see any performance increase for the moment. Infact it might even perform less (again for now)

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Johan Karlborg 
  To: rc5 at lists.distributed.net 
  Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 7:17 PM
  Subject: Re: [RC5] Performance on P-IV

  A dry remark, but someone's gotta do it =)
  I'd say it's a 61.64 % increase, not 161.64%
  Nevermind! Details, details! The big issue is that there's no logic in your discussion.
  The distributed.net core for AMD-K7 is just that, made especially for that processor and its extended set of instructions, whilst there is yet no core for the PIV in the distributed.net. The comparison is highly unfair.
  I am also running a T-bird at 1 GHz and I'm fine with that and I really don't care for the PIV (yet), but if you're going to badmouth it, at least have some substance to your arguments. 
  And one other thing.
  of course you're not running any services in WinME, there's no such thing as a service in that OS =)
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Ferry van Steen 
    To: rc5 at lists.distributed.net 
    Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 11:31 AM
    Subject: [RC5] Performance on P-IV

    Hey I've got some sad sad sad statistics. I hope there is an explanation for this because else I have to advise everybody NOT to buy Pentium-IV's because this is sad.....

    Ok.. the distributed net does NOT recognize P-IV's yet so it does a micro bench and selects Core #2 RG Class 6 which is the same core running on P-II's. Knowing this you would suspect a performance increase on a P-IV 1400 compared to P-II 400 of 1400/400 = 3.5 which would mean 350% performance increase in MHz so the pure calculative power should increase 350% also... Ding WRONG.

    My P-II 400 on Core #2 RG Class 6 Win2K with some services runs 1,128,585,13 according to dnetc -benchmark rc5
    The P-IV 1400 (1.4GHz) running -benchmark rc5 Core #2 RG  Class 6 only makes a LOUSY 1,824,190,86 on a freshly installed WinME without any services.

    This is only a lousy 161.64% (182419086/112858513*100) increase over a 350% increase of MHz's

    To give another example
    (This runs on linux btw, and the tests I've done the rc5 clients run faster on linux in any case (using the exact same hardware RC5 goes faster under linux than under win)
    My AMD Athlon 1000 (1 GHz) scores a friggin' absolutely awesome 3,538,971.00 Hahaha a 1GHz Athlon is almost TWICE as fast as a stinking P-IV 1400 which has 400MHz more under ít's belt. This is scary shit... Hehe Guess I shouldn't buy intel... Atleast not until everything is optimized because this is really sad.

    Hope somebody can explain this....

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.distributed.net/pipermail/rc5/attachments/20010511/21ab02dc/attachment-0001.htm

More information about the rc5 mailing list