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):
1. 572562; 592026; 97%
2. 9139; 9380; 97%
3. 3665; 3053; 120%
4. 11389; 6429; 177%
5. 4198; 3060; 137%
6. 4831; 3591; 135%
7. 99020; 21340; 464%
8. 74777; 25683; 291%
9. 3525; 2322; 152%
10. 3006; 1861; 162%
[Key:
1. = Processor-looped instructions (cache);
2. = Memory-Multiple register transfer;
3. = Rectangle Copy — Graphics acceleration test;
4. = Icon plotting — 16 colour sprite with mask;
5. = Draw path — Stroke narrow line;
6. = Draw fill — Plot filled shape;
7. = HD Read — Block load 1MB file;
8. = HD Write — Block save 1MB file;
9. = FS Read — Byte stream file in;
10. = FS Write — Byte stream file out.
The results above are averages of 3 iterations per OS version (in fact
the variations were very small); the base system remains the same in
both cases (3.4GHz Core i7 quad-core running W7 (64-bit)), and both
RPCEmu versions use the Recompiler mode. The only other difference is
RPCEmu's memory allocation; 4.02 has 256MB, 5.17 has 128MB. Both
versions display at 1680 × 1050 × 16M. Jeffrey Lee commented on the
advantages under emulation of a 32-bit OS here:
http://www.riscosopen.org/forum/forums/10/topics/961 Nevertheless, I
find the degree of difference generally, and in particular, HD/FS
Read/Writes and Icon plotting, surprising.
George
--
george greenfield
_______________________________________________
Rpcemu mailing list
Rpcemu@riscos.info
http://www.riscos.info/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rpcemu
No comments:
Post a Comment