Here's a little performance table:
SpecINT Spec FP92 Mhz Cache
Mips 3000 27.3 29.3 40 0+128k Dec 5240 numbers
486/66 32 16 33/66 8k Intel announcement*
4000PC 35 34 50/100 8k+8k Sgi periodic chart
4200 55 30 40/80 8k+16k? Nec Broshure (no details)*
4000SC 60 58 50/100 8k+8k+1MB SGI periodic chart
Powerpc 60+ 80+ 66 32k Motorolla ad *
Pentium 64.5 56.9 66 8k+8k Intel announcement *
R4400SC 97 88 75/150 16k+16k+1MB SGI periodic chart.
* = Spec numbers are probably obtained using an unmentioned 2nd level cache.
IMHO anything at the 4200 performance level or above looks great to me.
Question is how does the 4200 get it's speed? It running 20% slower then the
mips 4000PC, and supposedly has longer pipelines, and less fp support.
Is it possible it supports a second level cache? Or it it just above a very
important 1st level cache threshold that gives it twice the perfomance of the
4200 for this benchmark? (I.e. in real world not faster then the 4000PC)
Or was the 4200 paired with some custom memory subsystem that implemented
a seperate cache controller for the 2nd level cache?
Bill 1st> Broadley@neurocog.lrdc.pitt.edu
Broadley@schneider3.lrdc.pitt.edu <2nd 3rd> Broadleyemail@example.com
Linux is great. Bike to live, live to bike. PGP-ok