Re: Trivia: Processor MHz

[Neil Palmer <NeilP@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I thought the 170-2289 & 2290 were "throttled back" versions of the 2291.

...Neil





"Nathan M. Andelin" <nandelin@relational-data.com>
Sent by: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
2001/12/27 13:00
Please respond to midrange-l


        To:     <midrange-l@midrange.com>
        cc:
        Subject:        Re: Trivia:  Processor MHz


From: "Leif Svalgaard" <leif@leif.org>
> It may be fun to see the values for several other
> boxes.

Leif,

The test you shared with us seems to calculate a range between 120 Mhz and
140 Mhz on my 170-2290.  The published chip speed is 200 Mhz.

But this exercise reminded me of a CPU bound benchmark that Joe Pluta and
I
ran on our respective systems.  This CPU bound job took 17 times longer to
run on a 170-2290 than the 270-2250.  No significant other work was going
on
at the time.  But the calculated Mhz of the 270-2250 is approximately
double.

What gives?  Shouldn't Mhz be a close indicator of the amount of time a
job
spends in the CPU?

Nathan M. Andelin
www.relational-data.com