On 23 Oct 2012, george greenfield <george.greenfield@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> I recently ran Richard Spencer's benchmarking app romark 1.01 on both
> my RPCEmu installations (0.8.8/5.17 and 0.8.9/4.02 respectively). Here
> are the results (0.8.8/5.17 first, % advantage of 0.8.8/5.17 last):
I've now carried out the same exercise on my own installation comprising
0.8.9/5.19 and 0.8.9/4.39 running on Win7 (32bit) on a 1.6GHz Core2 Duo
machine. Both virtual machines have 256MB memory. My screen resolution
is 1360x768. For ease of comparison, my results are appended to yours:
George Tony
1. 572562; 592026; 97% 269685, 283301, 95%
2. 9139; 9380; 97% 3060, 2381, 129%
3 . 3665; 3053; 120% 1246, 1014, 123%
4. 11389; 6429; 177% 4573, 2148, 213%
5. 4198; 3060; 137% 1638, 1148, 143%
6. 4831; 3591; 135% 1898, 1526, 124%
7. 99020; 21340; 464% 87192, 8302, 1050%
8. 74777; 25683; 291% 93275, 8861, 1053%
9. 3525; 2322; 152% 1487, 1085, 137%
10. 3006; 1861; 162% 1348, 730, 185%
My results confirm your conclusion that, under emulation, RO 5.xx is
considerably faster than RO 4.xx. The differential for tests 7 and 8 (HD
Read and HD Write) is even more striking.
Tony
_______________________________________________
Rpcemu mailing list
Rpcemu@riscos.info
http://www.riscos.info/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rpcemu
No comments:
Post a Comment