SPONSORED LINKS
Excellent question Geo, and I'm with you re the significance of these (to me) unintelligible numbers. No doubt, though, instead of a simple "yes" or "no," most who answer your question will say something along the lines of: "It depends on what you want the machine to do." Personally, I'd say that unless you're writing space shuttle code, don't upgrade. Peter At 06:49 PM 12/31/97 -0500, Geovanny M. Ortiz wrote: >All these numbers are too technical for me. My question is: Is it worth >the money for the upgrade? > >Geo, out. >-----Original Message----- >From: Randal Whittle <rwhittle@usa.net> >To: TP List <tp750@cs.utk.edu> >Date: Wednesday, December 31, 1997 1:22 PM >Subject: Upgraded 701C Benchmark Results > > >> >>I just sent an Excel file with all of the Winstone and Winbench Test >>results to Emanuel Brown, who I'm sure will get this set up on his web page >>for all to see. That also includes my own benchmarking of my P120-based >>ThinkPad 560 as well as my desktop Pentium Pro 200 for your comparison. >> >>Please note that there are some Winstone scores that just won't show up. >>For some reason, there are certain tests that my 701 just *won't* >>complete--it hangs on the Netscape Navigator test and the PowerPoint 97 >>test, in particular. Unfortunately, this in turn messes up some of the >>overall test scores because it fails in these areas. >> >>Until Emanuel can set that up and you can get over to see those, I thought >>I could pass along the results of some of the "simpler" tests--that of >>Norton System Information (2.0--included in Norton Utils for Windows 2.0) >>and Wintune 95. >> >>The "Stock" 701C yielded a Norton SI score of 4.0. The SI score after the >>upgrade was 6.7. For comparison, a "typical" (I presume desktop) 386SX-16 >>serves as the baseline at 1.0. A 486-33 (I presume desktop) is a 5.9, and >>a Pentium 90 is 20.4. That gives you some idea of what Nortn SI thinks of >>the upgrade. Keep in mind this is a CPU-only benchmark. >> >>Please note that the following is *exactly* what the benchmark reports. In >>particular, the AMD 486 thing. Supposedly, this new CPU is an AMD >>"Enhanced"5x86, but no, that doesn't make it a Pentium. The benchmark >>apparently isn't fooled either--they see it as a 486 at 100 MHz. Basically >>it appears to be a clock-quadrupled (as opposed to tripled, as is the stock >>CPU in the 701) 25-MHz-based 486, plus the added advantage of AMD's >>floating-point math-coprocessor being extra fast (you can see that in the >>Whetstone score below). >> >>For Wintune 95, here's the details: >> >> >> Upgraded 701C Stock 701C >> -------------- --------------- >>CPU AMD 486 Intel 486DX4 >>Clock 100 MHz 75 MHz >>Dhrystone 36 MIPS 25 MIPS >>Whetstone 16 MFLOPS 6.9 MFLOPS >>Video Speed 2.9 MP/s 2.1 MP/s >>C: Cached Speed 4.4 MB/s 4.7 MB/s >>C: Uncached " 1.1 MB/s 1.1 MB/s >>RAM Read Avg. 84 MB/s 70 MB/s >>RAM Write Avg. 28 MB/s 30 MB/s >>RAM Copy Avg. 15 MB/s 13 MB/s >> >> >>If you just *can't* wait for Mr. Brown to put up the Excel file with the >>Winstone and Winbench scores on his web page, upon request I can send you >>the Excel file. Just let me know in private E-mail. I am reluctant to >>just send the file to the list because not everyone wants to or cares to >>see it. >> >> >>------- >>Randal J. Whittle whittle@usc.edu (213) 740-7775 >>Director, Electronic Commerce Program >>Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California > -- Peter Lewis pele@wolfenet.com