Re: [MacPerl] MacPERL Performace vs. Intel Class systems

[pudge@pobox.com (Chris Nandor)]

At 15.15 10/13/97, Paul DuBois wrote:
>I ran the test program on my 9600/300 and it took ... 1 second.

At 22.27 10/13/97, Nat Irons wrote:
>I think there's a reason those "very obscure" benchmark solutions are in
>use, and "fun with incrementation" isn't.  I ran that script on a Quadra
>800 and came back with 70 seconds, 64 with extensions off.
>
>With a test like this one, drive access could easily pose as much of a
>bottleneck as anything else.

There can be extenuating circumstances, yes, but the speed increase is obviously there.  A couple of benchmarks.  For the 180, I had both MacPerl versions loaded at the same time, so the configuration was exaclty the same.

PowerCenter Pro 180 (604/180 60 MHz bus)
        MacPerl 5.1.4r4:              2 seconds
        MacPerl 5.1.3r2:             18 seconds
Power Mac 7100/66: 14 seconds
        MacPerl 5.1.4r4:             14 seconds
        perl5.004_04 (MkLinuxDR2.1): 15 seconds

--
Chris Nandor             pudge@pobox.com             http://pudge.net/
%PGPKey=('B76E72AD',[1024,'0824 090B CE73 CA10  1FF7 7F13 8180 B6B6'])
#==            MacPerl:  Programming for the Rest of Us            ==#
#==    Publishing Date: Early 1998. http://www.ptf.com/macperl/    ==#



***** Want to unsubscribe from this list?
***** Send mail with body "unsubscribe" to mac-perl-request@iis.ee.ethz.ch