Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 09:19:46 +1100
From: Bill Currie <billc AT blackmagic DOT tait DOT co DOT nz>
Subject: Re: FYI: speed of Allegro/DJGPP
In-reply-to: <Pine.SUN.3.91.971029110354.26592P-100000@is>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Message-id: <199710292016.JAA05706@teleng1.tait.co.nz gatekeeper.tait.co.nz>
Organization: Tait Electronics Limited
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
References: <34548295 DOT 731EF500 AT nuson DOT nl>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <billc AT blackmagic DOT tait DOT co DOT nz>
Precedence: bulk

On 29 Oct 97 at 11:04, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> If you search the DJGPP mail archives, I think you will find that it
> was shown here time and again that, given an optimal setup, lots of
> RAM, and the same processor and disk, DJGPP on DOS doesn't fall
> behind Lunix by more than 30%.  Anybody who looks at the numbers
> will realize that ``cool'' OS features mean much less for
> performance than raw CPU and I/O power and a good system setup.

I can only agree with this wholeheartedly.  My 386-33 with 12M of 
memory (3-4 used for cache/ramdisk) beat the pants off a 486-50 with 
8M (same config otherwise). Yes, I know the faq says not to use a 
ramdisk with <16M, but I found that a 2.5M ramdisk with (compressed) 
gcc, cc1, cc1plus, cpp, and as (ld?) leaving ~.75M for temp space 
made a significant diference and I could have a small cache (.5-1M).  
BTW this is with good old DOS (OpenDos 7.01).  This was faster than a 
2M-3M cache and No ramdisk.

The moral of my story? Raw cpu power is not enough, you need that 
memory too. Configure configure configure...

Oh, giving gcc the -v option is a good way of debugging your 
configuration.

Hmm, now that my 386 has 16M, maybe I'll pop the system includes on 
the ram disk as well...

Bill
--
Leave others their otherness.