delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
From: | Eugene Leitl <eugene DOT leitl AT lrz DOT uni-muenchen DOT de> |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
Date: | Mon, 5 Jul 1999 13:24:47 -0700 (PDT) |
To: | pgcc AT delorie DOT com |
Subject: | RE: K7 potentials |
In-Reply-To: | <000201bec6bb$2124dac0$41d16482@ellemtel.se> |
References: | <377EAA7B DOT 2938D401 AT recomnet DOT net> |
<000201bec6bb$2124dac0$41d16482 AT ellemtel DOT se> | |
X-Mailer: | VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid |
Message-ID: | <14209.5222.833172.825211@lrz.de> |
Reply-To: | pgcc AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | pgcc AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
David Jonsson writes: > > > Well, K7 550 MHz 109% SPECint_base95 and 146% SPECfp_base95 if > > > compared to a 550 MHz Pentium III. > > You have not read the figures correctly. The figures are 9-46% faster or 109-146% _of_ the performance of a PIII 550 MHz. While I was saying?
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |