On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 08:05:24AM +0200, Egor Tur wrote:
> Hi.
> A little question: programme `linux_logo' show 1264.84 Bogomips Total on my system,
> but `bogomips' - 634.00 BogoMips. Why do these values be different?
Possibly you have a dual-CPU machine since 634*2 ~= 1264.
Egor Tur said:
> Hi.
> A little question: programme `linux_logo' show 1264.84 Bogomips Total on
> my system, but `bogomips' - 634.00 BogoMips. Why do these values be
> different? Thanx.
maybe they use different methods to get the result. maybe there was
some program running
Hi.
A little question: programme `linux_logo' show 1264.84 Bogomips Total on my system,
but `bogomips' - 634.00 BogoMips. Why do these values be different?
Thanx.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 10:06:20PM +0200, Hugo van der Merwe wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I recently (this weekend) reïnstalled potato on a laptop, pentium 120,
> which used to have a couple of months old version of potato on it. It used
> to have a bogomips rating of about 48, if I rem
Hello,
I recently (this weekend) reïnstalled potato on a laptop, pentium 120,
which used to have a couple of months old version of potato on it. It used
to have a bogomips rating of about 48, if I remember correctly. Now,
suddenly, with the default kernel (2.2.17...pre6 somethingorother, it used
http://metalab.unc.edu/pub/Linux/docs/HOWTO/mini/BogoMips
Regards,
Onno
At 12:59 PM 2/19/00 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Hi there,
>
>could anyone please tell me what "BogoMIPS" at bootup means?
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>Uwe
>
>
>--
>Unsubsc
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>could anyone please tell me what "BogoMIPS" at bootup means?
See the BogoMips mini-HOWTO, which you should be able to find in
/usr/doc/HOWTO or /usr/share/doc/HOWTO depending on your version of
Debian.
`MIPS is short for Millions of Instructions Pe
Hi there,
could anyone please tell me what "BogoMIPS" at bootup means?
Thanks in advance,
Uwe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Thu, 16 Dec 1999, Tim Nicholas wrote:
> > Alberto Maurizi wrote:
> > > Is this normal? I mean, that so low bogomips value.
> >
> > > model name : Pentium 60/66
> > > cpu MHz : 59.999660
> > &
On Thu, Dec 16, 1999 at 10:59:18AM +1300, Tim Nicholas wrote:
> > Alberto Maurizi wrote:
> > > Is this normal? I mean, that so low bogomips value.
> >
> > > model name : Pentium 60/66
> > > cpu MHz : 59.999660
> > > bogomip
> Alberto Maurizi wrote:
> >
> > Is this normal? I mean, that so low bogomips value.
>
> > model name : Pentium 60/66
>
> > cpu MHz : 59.999660
>
> > bogomips: 23.91
>
> I've got an Intel P133. Approximating p
Alberto Maurizi wrote:
>
> Is this normal? I mean, that so low bogomips value.
> model name : Pentium 60/66
> cpu MHz : 59.999660
> bogomips: 23.91
I've got an Intel P133. Approximating pro rata using your data
gives 23.91 / 60 * 133 = 53. A
Is this normal? I mean, that so low bogomips value.
processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 5
model : 1
model name : Pentium 60/66
stepping: 7
cpu MHz : 59.999660
fdiv_bug: no
hlt_bug : no
sep_bug : no
On Sun, 16 May 1999, R. Brock Lynn wrote:
> " Raymond A. Ingles" wrote:
> > On Sun, 9 May 1999, George Bonser wrote:
> > > Well I got the old 386 put back together [...] Now it is running
> > > Debian and MAN is it S-L-O-W.
[...]
> > > I guess I won't be compiling any kernels on that box ... wel
" Raymond A. Ingles" wrote:
>
> On Sun, 9 May 1999, George Bonser wrote:
> > Well I got the old 386 put back together, figured I would use it for a
> > firewall. 386SX33 with 10MB of RAM. Man, what an example to show what OS
> > bloat has done! I used to install Win31 on it, even installed OS/2
> Oh, I agree. Note that I am installing a pretty minimum system anyway. It
> was not the size of the packages I was complaining about, it was the the
> debian utils seem to be rather inefficient. I imagine anoyone installing
> on a 486 would see the same things.
>
> My biggest peeve was the "rede
Hans van den Boogert schrieb:
>
> I understand what MIPS is (Million Instructions per Second), but what does
> the bogo stand for? My 486-33 measures 4 bogoMIPS during Linux boot-up, so
> how is this calculated? -Hans
>
hello Hans,
the Bogomips-howto may give you further inform
On Sun, 9 May 1999, Pann McCuaig wrote:
> On Sun, May 09, 1999 at 04:50:30PM -0700, George Bonser wrote:
> > I guess I won't be compiling any kernels on that box ... well, maybe ONE
> > just to see how long it takes.
> > :)
> If memory serves, my first linux box, a 386SX-16 with 4MB took abo
> I understand what MIPS is (Million Instructions per Second), but what does
> the bogo stand for? My 486-33 measures 4 bogoMIPS during Linux boot-up, so
> how is this calculated? -Hans
It means 'bogus MIPS', in that it's not the real MIPS value for your system,
but a c
*- On 12 May, Hans van den Boogert wrote about "Off-topic: what is bogoMIPS?"
> I understand what MIPS is (Million Instructions per Second), but what does
> the bogo stand for? My 486-33 measures 4 bogoMIPS during Linux boot-up, so
> how is this calculated? -Hans
>
>
I understand what MIPS is (Million Instructions per Second), but what does
the bogo stand for? My 486-33 measures 4 bogoMIPS during Linux boot-up, so
how is this calculated? -Hans
hardware? Or at LEAST as fast as Windows.
> The kernel seems fast enough but the distro-specific stuff is pretty
> doggy.
Once the system is installed, it does perform sufficiently well
(talking of an AMD386 DX40 w/ 16MB , though), IMHO, but the install
is a pain nevertheless. It was clocke
On Sun, 9 May 1999, George Bonser wrote:
>
> Well I got the old 386 put back together, figured I would use it for a
> firewall. 386SX33 with 10MB of RAM. Man, what an example to show what OS
> bloat has done! I used to install Win31 on it, even installed OS/2 Warp
> on it. Now it is running Debi
George Bonser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In dselect the Scanning available packages .. part puts out about
> one dot every three seconds.
Isn't this output from 'dpkg'?, it can build huge internal tables (or
something like that at least it grew to a wopping 13MB RSS for me
once.). How
On Sun, 9 May 1999, George Bonser wrote:
>
> Well I got the old 386 put back together, figured I would use it for a
> firewall. 386SX33 with 10MB of RAM. Man, what an example to show what OS
> bloat has done! I used to install Win31 on it, even installed OS/2 Warp
> on it. Now it is running Debi
On Sun, May 09, 1999 at 04:50:30PM -0700, George Bonser wrote:
>
> Well I got the old 386 put back together, figured I would use it for a
> firewall. 386SX33 with 10MB of RAM. Man, what an example to show what OS
> bloat has done! I used to install Win31 on it, even installed OS/2 Warp
> on it. N
George Bonser writes:
> Man, I think maybe the maintainers should be forced to install their
> stuff on a 386 just to get some perspective. CPU horsepower sure can
> cover up inefficient code. Or to put it another way, an system without
> any CPU horsepower sure exposes the inefficiencies.
Hmm. A
Another thing to think about might be NFSing what you need from another
machine. Use the 386 as what amounts to (almost) a diskless client that
gets all its files off another machine except /boot.
On Sun, 9 May 1999, Carl Mummert wrote:
> >Well I got the old 386 put back together, figured I wou
>Well I got the old 386 put back together, figured I would use it for a
>firewall. 386SX33 with 10MB of RAM. Man, what an example to show what OS
>bloat has done! I used to install Win31 on it, even installed OS/2 Warp
>on it. Now it is running Debian and MAN is it S-L-O-W.
>In dselect the Scanni
On Fri, 30 Apr 1999, Colin Tree wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a P166 sitting right behind me
> and it comes up with 66.00 BogoMips.
>
> but in front of me is a K6-11-350
> which peaks out at 696.00 BogoMips.
>
> Sooo does that mean I can do more than
> 10 times as much
On Sat, 24 Apr 1999, Sami Dalouche wrote:
Hi,
I have a P166 sitting right behind me
and it comes up with 66.00 BogoMips.
but in front of me is a K6-11-350
which peaks out at 696.00 BogoMips.
Sooo does that mean I can do more than
10 times as much work on the K6 ??
What a sales gimick
My cyrix P166+ (a 133 Mhz CPU) displays :
Calibrating delay loop.. ok - 132.00 BogoMips
On Sat, Apr 24, 1999 at 11:42:52AM +0100, Pedro Guerreiro wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I'm having a problem with a machine in the lab. It's a Pentium 166 with 32Mb,
> but the reported Bogomips a
Subject: Re: What are the Bogomips for a P166?
Date: Fri, Apr 23, 1999 at 02:44:45PM -0700
In reply to:bradleyb
Quoting bradleyb([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Fri, 23 Apr 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > My p75 here at work is 23 bogo mips. So a 150 would be
Pedro,
You should really ignore the BogoMIPS rating. It doesn't make any
sense. On my dual 90MHz Pentium, I get 72 BogoMIPS. On my notebook
computer running a 200MHz MMX Pentium, I get 399 BogoMIPS. And on my
300 MHz Pentium II, I get 307 BogoMIPS. It makes no sense whats
On Fri, 23 Apr 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> My p75 here at work is 23 bogo mips. So a 150 would be around 50 - 60.
My p75 has 29 bogoMips, you might want to check your configuration.
Since we're on the subject, I also have an AMD 486DX4-100 - with about 50
BogoMips. the probl
On Fri, 23 Apr 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 12:14:46 -0400 (EDT)
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: Pedro Guerreiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: What are the Bogomips for a P166?
> Resent-Date: Fri, 23
On Sat, Apr 24, 1999 at 11:42:52AM +0100, Pedro Guerreiro wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I'm having a problem with a machine in the lab. It's a Pentium 166 with 32Mb,
> but the reported Bogomips are just 66.??. Somehow, this doesn't look to normal
> to me, since my Pentium 225
Subject: RE: What are the Bogomips for a P166?
Date: Fri, Apr 23, 1999 at 12:13:00PM -0400
In reply to:Dan Willard
Quoting Dan Willard([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> I get the same number with my P5 166s. Is your 225 a P-Pro? They changed
> something (I can't remember
7113). Please read include/linux/pci.h
Warning : Unknown PCI device (1000:f). Please read include/linux/pci.h
Warning : Unknown PCI device (1002:4755). Please read include/linux/pci.h
Calibrating delay loop.. ok - 331.78 BogoMIPS
Memory: 30440k/32768k available (984k kernel code, 384k reserved,
From: Pedro Guerreiro [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, April 24, 1999 6:43 AM
> To: Debian User
> Subject: What are the Bogomips for a P166?
>
> Hi.
>
> I'm having a problem with a machine in the lab. It's a Pentium 166 with
> 32Mb,
> but the repor
>
> Hi.
>
> I'm having a problem with a machine in the lab. It's a Pentium 166 with 32Mb,
> but the reported Bogomips are just 66.??. Somehow, this doesn't look to normal
> to me, since my Pentium 225 MMX is giving 447.?? Bogomips.
>
My p75 here at work
Hi.
I'm having a problem with a machine in the lab. It's a Pentium 166 with 32Mb,
but the reported Bogomips are just 66.??. Somehow, this doesn't look to normal
to me, since my Pentium 225 MMX is giving 447.?? Bogomips.
One other thing is that since I've upgraded to Slin
p . . .
>
> Just screwed together a couple of new boxes. AMD K6/2-350 CPUs.
>
> The kernel on the slink rescue disk (2.1.8) as well as the kernel
> installed as slink:kernel-image-2.0.36 both report ~350 bogomips.
>
> The kernel on Tom's Root Boot Disk reports ~700 bogom
~350 bogomips.
The kernel on Tom's Root Boot Disk reports ~700 bogomips.
We're talking 2.0.36 in all cases.
Any ideas?
--
your man pann
On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Peter Bartosch wrote:
> > On 19-Jan-99, Peter Bartosch took time to write :
> > >> bogomips should only depend on hardware no ?
> > >
> > > only on cpu (and clock)
> >
> > that's what i thought too, but it doesn't
Hi!
> On 19-Jan-99, Peter Bartosch took time to write :
> >> bogomips should only depend on hardware no ?
> >
> > only on cpu (and clock)
>
> that's what i thought too, but it doesn't seem true in my case
> as with exactly the same hardware and no
On 19-Jan-99, Peter Bartosch took time to write :
>> bogomips should only depend on hardware no ?
>
> only on cpu (and clock)
that's what i thought too, but it doesn't seem true in my case
as with exactly the same hardware and no change in bios
i have
700 bogomips wit
ewer production-masks (and hopefully
with less errors)
> i have two 64Mo chips 100MHz coming from different manufacturers (could that
> be the cause ?)
> will bogomips change if memory changes ?
no it won't, bogomips depend only on your cpu (-registers)
> > I have found i
On 18-Jan-99, Tino Schwarze took time to write :
> REMEMBER: BogoMIPS, are bogus only - they DO NOT tell you anything about
> your processors real performance. So, I guess, the calibration loop used
but they at least tell you if you have something badly misconfigured
> for ca
On 19-Jan-99, James Pollard took time to write :
> i've not messed around with BogoMIPS really, but i do have one question.
> your BogoMIPS count went up dramatically, but did it really feel like you
> had a performance increase? if so, why switch back? if not, why care
> abo
2.0.36 compiled as 686 and as 586 i had only 350Bogomips with a 350MHz
> > K6-2
> >
> > BUT (!) with 2.2.0pre7 compiled with CONFIG_M586TSC=y i have my full 700
> > bogomips !
> > with it /proc/cpuinfo shows everything right (CPU clock,etc...)
> >
> > That's s
;
> BUT (!) with 2.2.0pre7 compiled with CONFIG_M586TSC=y i have my full 700
> bogomips !
> with it /proc/cpuinfo shows everything right (CPU clock,etc...)
>
> That's strange isn't it ? Probably a strange compilation quirk somewhere
>
> I'll stick with 2.0.36 f
Mark Wagnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > REMEMBER: BogoMIPS, are bogus only - they DO NOT tell you anything about
> > your processors real performance.
> Would you happen to know of any Linux benchmarking utilities that will
> measure a system's ability to p
Tino Schwarze wrote:
>
> REMEMBER: BogoMIPS, are bogus only - they DO NOT tell you anything about
> your processors real performance. So, I guess, the calibration loop used for
> calculation BogoMIPS is somehow broken if you compile 2.0.36 for 686 instead
> of 586 (as adv
Hi Patrick,
> With 2.0.36 compiled as 686 and as 586 i had only 350Bogomips with a 350MHz
> K6-2
>
> BUT (!) with 2.2.0pre7 compiled with CONFIG_M586TSC=y i have my full 700
> bogomips !
> with it /proc/cpuinfo shows everything right (CPU clock,etc...)
>
> That's
Thanks all for your input.
The problem is solved in a way.
Before mucking with hardware i tried few software things.
With 2.0.36 compiled as 686 and as 586 i had only 350Bogomips with a 350MHz
K6-2
BUT (!) with 2.2.0pre7 compiled with CONFIG_M586TSC=y i have my full 700
bogomips !
with it
On Sun, Jan 17, 1999 at 11:13:41AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I think i have a problem with one of my new K6-2 box.
> I have two boxes : same motherboard (ASUS P5A) , same amount of memory
> (128Mo).
> Same output of /proc/cpuinfo for both
>
> *except* for bogomips.
&g
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think i have a problem with one of my new K6-2 box.
>
> I have two boxes : same motherboard (ASUS P5A) , same amount of memory
> (128Mo).
> Same output of /proc/cpuinfo for both
>
> *except* for bogomips.
>
> One is a
On Sun, 17 Jan 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> otherwise the 'compile as [386/486/Pentium/PentiumPro]' option in kernel
> compilation could change the bogomips rating or not ?
> i compiled it as a 686.
> should i compile it as a 586 ?
>From Configure.help:
- &quo
> cpuid : yes
> wp : yes
> flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 syscr mmx 3dnow
> bogomips: 801.18
i have :
processor : 0
cpu : 586
model : AMD-K6(tm) 3D processor
vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
stepping
n:
>> what should i check ? bios settings ?
>> (the howto is not precise enough imho)
>
> Quote from the howto:
> Many CPUs are prone to faulty setups of
>
> · memory cache setting (write-back is wrong for BogoMips, often
> reported lower than 5; write-
fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 syscr mmx 3dnow
bogomips: 801.18
Sorry if I state the obvious, but you are running at 3.5 x 100 MHz? You
do have 100 MHz memory?
I have found in the past on a couple of occasions I have had ludicrously
low bogomips figures and have re-compiled the kernel
emory cache setting (write-back is wrong for BogoMips, often
reported lower than 5; write-through is ok)
· turbo-buttons (should be ON)
· BIOS-software emulated fake cache (change it for real cache)
· similar cache and clock related things.
Marcus
--
"Rhubarb is no Egyptia
On 17-Jan-99, Marcus Brinkmann took time to write :
>> One is a 350MHz and it gives me ~350 Bogomips
>> the other is a 400MHz and it gives me ~800 Bogomips
>>
>> I think there is a problem. What do you think ?
>
> No.
i think there is, see below
>> What
On Sun, Jan 17, 1999 at 11:13:41AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> One is a 350MHz and it gives me ~350 Bogomips
> the other is a 400MHz and it gives me ~800 Bogomips
>
> I think there is a problem. What do you think ?
No.
> What should i check first ?
Read the Bogomips mini-H
Hi,
I think i have a problem with one of my new K6-2 box.
I have two boxes : same motherboard (ASUS P5A) , same amount of memory
(128Mo).
Same output of /proc/cpuinfo for both
*except* for bogomips.
One is a 350MHz and it gives me ~350 Bogomips
the other is a 400MHz and it gives me ~800
Subject: Re: bogomips
Date: Fri, Nov 13, 1998 at 07:27:12AM -0600
>
> I remember back in '98 when [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Yes. 2.0.34/35 on Slackware 149.9. On debian 2.0.34 120 Bogomips and
> > on 2.0.35 130.6. The .config's on bot
-> > w> Yes that would seem about right. The problem I have is that my
-> > w> 166MMX gives me 149.9 BogoMips on my Slackware partition and only
-> > w> 130.6 on my Debian partition. Same hardware (same box).
-> >
-> > Same kernelversion? The bogomips imple
Subject: Re: bogomips
Date: Thu, Nov 12, 1998 at 12:56:21AM +0100
In reply to:Martin Bialasinski
Quoting Martin Bialasinski([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
>
> >> "w" == wtopa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> w> Yes that would seem about right. T
> On Tue, 10 Nov 1998, Oz Dror wrote:
>
> > Hi
> > I have a pentium-II 400Mhz and a pentium MMX 200Mhz
> > both have 400.59 bogomips
> > Why?
>
> SWAG (Silly Wild-Assed Guess):
>
> The memory is the same speed? Since Intel guesses wrong in th
>> "w" == wtopa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
w> Yes that would seem about right. The problem I have is that my
w> 166MMX gives me 149.9 BogoMips on my Slackware partition and only
w> 130.6 on my Debian partition. Same hardware (same box).
Same kernelversion? The
Subject: Re: bogomips
Date: Wed, Nov 11, 1998 at 01:19:22PM +0100
In reply to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 10, 1998 at 10:24:46PM -0800, Oz Dror wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi
> > > I
Hi,
Just deleted the email from the guy who had 400 bogomips for his Pentium
200 MMX with the standard debian kernel, and only 200 after compiling his
own. Could this be because of the CPU type for which the kernel is
optimized? I'd figure that the standard kernel would be only optimize
i'm running a 2.0.33 kernel from the installation disks and it gives me
400.59 Bogomips for a pentium 200MMX running on a compaq laptop. I
recompiled the kernel and it gave me about 208 bogomips after the new
kernel was recompiled, and the bogomips mystery continued.
btw, i did rea
>
> On Tue, Nov 10, 1998 at 10:24:46PM -0800, Oz Dror wrote:
> >
> > Hi
> > I have a pentium-II 400Mhz and a pentium MMX 200Mhz
> > both have 400.59 bogomips
> > Why?
> >
>
> MMX doubles your bogomips. MMX CPUs are evidently great at running
&
On Tue, Nov 10, 1998 at 10:24:46PM -0800, Oz Dror wrote:
>
> Hi
> I have a pentium-II 400Mhz and a pentium MMX 200Mhz
> both have 400.59 bogomips
> Why?
>
MMX doubles your bogomips. MMX CPUs are evidently great at running
empty loops.
miket
On Tue, 10 Nov 1998, Oz Dror wrote:
> Hi
> I have a pentium-II 400Mhz and a pentium MMX 200Mhz
> both have 400.59 bogomips
> Why?
>
Because bogomips are bogus and meaningless?
Andrew Tarr
"If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipita
Hi
I have a pentium-II 400Mhz and a pentium MMX 200Mhz
both have 400.59 bogomips
Why?
--
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
NAME Oz Dror, Los Angeles, California
EMAIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] <>
PHONE Fax (310) 474-3126
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The bogomips value you see at booting time depends
only on the kernel, not on the distribution.
Maybe that the bogomips calculation algorithm is changed
from a kernel version to an other.
And remember that the bogomips value is bogus ;)
Michele
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ote:
> >
> > Hi, I just recently installed debian 2.0 on my pc at home and I just
> > noticed something odd as I booted. Since I have started using debian it
> > shows 249.04 bogomips whereas when I used to run slackware,redhat,suse it
> > would show 332.60 bogomips. I know th
and I just
> noticed something odd as I booted. Since I have started using debian it
> shows 249.04 bogomips whereas when I used to run slackware,redhat,suse it
> would show 332.60 bogomips. I know this probably isnt such a big deal but
> it struck me as being odd. I have built another
Hi, I just recently installed debian 2.0 on my pc at home and I just
noticed something odd as I booted. Since I have started using debian it
shows 249.04 bogomips whereas when I used to run slackware,redhat,suse it
would show 332.60 bogomips. I know this probably isnt such a big deal but
it struck
Hi,
I am using a 200MHz K6, which I now overclocked at 233 MHz. After
having done that, I checked the bogomips number, and I discovered in
/var/log/messages that, after having been at 400 since ever (as
expected, for a K6), it had dropped at 200 in the latest reboot and,
after having
83 matches
Mail list logo
