Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
From: gem...@homxb.UUCP (Rick Richardson)
Subject: 8/14/86 Dhrystone Benchmark Report
Date: Fri, 15-Aug-86 07:07:39 EDT
Posted: Fri Aug 15 07:07:39 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 17-Aug-86 08:15:01 EDT
Organization: PC Research, Inc.
Attached, please find the 08/14/86 list of DHRYSTONE 1.1 benchmark results.
I'm sorry it took so long to get this list together. The only excuse
I can offer is that it took a lot more wining and dining to convince
Margo to get engaged to me than I initially thought :-)!
I'll be posting the source code for DHRYSTONE 1.1 in a few days. It
has been well posted already, so you can probably get a copy from
I'm no longer accepting or reporting results from the 1.0 version.
Remember, the "goofed" version? I am now keeping a real database of
all the reported results. To help me in automating this process,
I am requesting that all results sent to me are on a copy of the
following form, and mailed to:
DHRYSTONE 1.1 BENCHMARK REPORTING FORM
A sample filled out form looks like this:
DHRYSTONE 1.1 BENCHMARK REPORTING FORM
MODEL: 6300 PLUS
NOTES: immersed unit in He
SUBMITTER: ihnp4!frostbite (Abby Normal)
The good news is that this new format allows reporting the information
in several ways. I have attached reports sorted by manufacturer and
by performance. I am also reporting all reasonable submissions, even
for identical configurations. I gave up trying to figure out which one
might be a better measure. These things aren't all that reliable a
measure of performance, anyhow, and anybody who quibbles over
say a 10% difference between machines is missing the point, as stated
There seems to have been a great deal of confusion over what this
benchmark measures, and how to use these results. Let me try to clarify
1) DHRYSTONE is a measure of processor+compiler efficiency in
executing a 'typical' program. The 'typical' program was
designed by measuring statistics on a great number of
'real' programs. The 'typical' program was then written
by Reinhold P. Weicker using these statistics. The
program is balanced according to statement type, as well
as data type.
2) DHRYSTONE does not use floating point. Typical programs don't.
3) DHRYSTONE does not do I/O. Typical programs do, but then
we'd have a whole can of worms opened up.
4) DHRYSTONE does not contain much code that can be optimized
by vector processors. That's why a CRAY doesn't look real
fast, they weren't built to do this sort of computing.
5) DHRYSTONE does not measure OS performance, as it avoids
calling the O.S. The O.S. is indicated in the results only
to help in identifying the compiler technology.
If somebody asked me to pick out the best machine for the money, I
wouldn't look at just the results of DHRYSTONE. I'd probably:
1) Run DHRYSTONE to get a feel for the compiler+processor
2) Run any number of benchmarks to check disk I/O bandwidth,
using both sequential and random read/writes.
3) Run a multitasking benchmark to check multi-user response
time. Typically, these benchmarks run several types of
programs such as editors, shell scripts, sorts, compiles,
and plot the results against the number of simulated users.
4) If appropriate for the intended use, run WHETSTONE, to determine
floating point performance.
5) If appropriate for intended use, run some programs which do
vector and matrix computations.
6) Figure out what the box will:
- cost to buy
- cost to operate and maintain
- be worth when it is sold
- be worth if the manufacturer goes out of business
7) Having done the above, I probably have a hand-full of
machines which meet my price/performance requirements.
Now, I find out if the applications programs I'd like
to use will run on any of these machines. I also find
out how much interest people have in writing new software
for the machine, and look carefully at the migration path
I will have to take when I reach the limits of the machine.
To summarize, DHRYSTONES by themselves are not anything more than
a way to win free beers when arguing 'Box-A versus Box-B' religion.
They do provide insight into Box-A/Compiler-A versus Box-A/Compiler-B
As usual, all comments and new results should be mailed directly
to me at ..ihnp4!castor!pcrat!rick. I will summarize
and post to the net. These results are also being sent to Rheinhold
Weicker for adding to his list of Pascal and Ada results.
A SPECIAL THANKS
I didn't write the DHRYSTONE benchmark. Rheinhold Weicker did. He has
certainly provided us with a useful tool for benchmarking, and is
to be congratulated.
PC Research, Inc.
(201) 834-1378 (9-17 EST)
(201) 922-1134 (7-9,17-24 EST)
..ihnp4!castor!pcrat!rick (normal mail)
..ihnp4!castor!pcrat!dry (results only)
USENET (Users’ Network) was a bulletin board shared among many computer
systems around the world. USENET was a logical network, sitting on top
of several physical networks, among them UUCP, BLICN, BERKNET, X.25, and
the ARPANET. Sites on USENET included many universities, private companies
and research organizations. See USENET Archives.
SCO Files Lawsuit Against IBM
March 7, 2003 - The SCO Group filed legal action against IBM in the State
Court of Utah for trade secrets misappropriation, tortious interference,
unfair competition and breach of contract. The complaint alleges that IBM
made concentrated efforts to improperly destroy the economic value of
UNIX, particularly UNIX on Intel, to benefit IBM's Linux services
business. See SCO v IBM.
The materials and information included in this website may only be used
for purposes such as criticism, review, private study, scholarship, or
Electronic mail: WorldWideWeb: