In message <[email protected] > Tom Walker <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thursday, 24 October 2013, 13:36, george greenfield > <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> There is the oft repeated story that !Desk_Bogo favours VRPC, but >>> Dhrystones indicate rpcemu is faster. > [snip] >>Indeed: that suspicion is supported by Chris Hall's benchmarks here >>https://www.riscosopen.org/forum/forums/5/topics/466?page=8 >>where VRPC on a 2668MHz PC gives only 175% compared to a bog-standard >>S/ARM RPC, i.e. 1524MHz = 100%; the corresponding figure for RPCEmu >>here is approx. 1000MHz = 100%. Obviously that assumes a similar >>processor type in the 2668MHz machine, which may not be the case. > > The frequently quoted 2668 MHz machine is most likely a Pentium 4. The > Core i7 quoted for the RPCemu results will be vastly quicker > clock-for-clock, therefore comparing performance across the different > emulators based solely on clock speeds of these two very different > machines is not very meaningful. > Fair enough, but the point is not whether exact measurements can be made, but whether a trend is revealed. RPCEmu0.8.8/4.02 Recompiler on my elderly Celeron 1500MHz XP laptop manages 112%, which is still relatively better than the VRPC result on the 2668MHz machine (not allowing for the >5% speed-up on later versions of RPCEmu), so the suspicion that VRPC runs slower remains intact. But granted, until someone with time on their hands /and/ both emulators on the same PC runs ROMark on both we're never going to know for sure. -- george greenfield _______________________________________________ Rpcemu mailing list [email protected] http://www.riscos.info/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rpcemu
