From:	Daniel <entropic AT mpx DOT com DOT au>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Question about long long math on intel archs
Date:	Thu, 04 Feb 1999 22:10:13 +1100
Organization:	Microplex PTY LTD
Lines:	17
Message-ID:	<36B98015.22DC0E3A@mpx.com.au>
References:	<3 DOT 0 DOT 6 DOT 32 DOT 19990202153421 DOT 0091a590 AT pop DOT netaddress DOT com>
	<3 DOT 0 DOT 6 DOT 32 DOT 19990202173547 DOT 00915bb0 AT pop DOT netaddress DOT com>
	<3 DOT 0 DOT 6 DOT 32 DOT 19990202223415 DOT 0094bda0 AT pop DOT netaddress DOT com> <3 DOT 0 DOT 6 DOT 32 DOT 19990204024816 DOT 008d9720 AT pop DOT netaddress DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	dialup-brisax11189.mpx.com.au
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	news1.mpx.com.au 918130021 2019 198.142.169.189 (4 Feb 1999 12:07:01 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT mpx DOT com DOT au
NNTP-Posting-Date:	4 Feb 1999 12:07:01 GMT
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language:	en
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Hello,

  Here's what my decaying 486DX2/66 running the program in a win95 dos
box had to say....

Did 1000000 long long multiplies in 2.03297 seconds.
Did 5000000 long long multiplies in 9.61538 seconds.
Did 10000000 long long multiplies in 17.9121 seconds.
Did 50000000 long long multiplies in 98.341 seconds.

but perhaps a comparison of long-operations and long-long-'s would be
more interesting?  after all we already know that different CPU's will
perform differently.. what is really interesting is how the performance
on the same CPU declines if long's are replaced by long-long's.  i might
do that tomorrow.

g'bye.

- Raw text -