CompuServe Messages

quantitative measures proferred along with any MIPS ratings, so as to be better able to compare these additional RELATIVE measures against other RELATIVE measures (don't forget that some of the system performance one is trying to "count" is also used "in the counting"). Since the basic measure of Millions of Instructions Per Second clearly identifies the units involved, this is NOT like relating MPG to saying "my car gets 60 unspecified distance units per some unspecified fuel units". The units are clearly identified. AGAIN, MIPS is NOT the best measure of system performance. I DO NOT ARGUE THAT. In fact, if anything, it tends to HIDE real system performance (and hearing this, the CPU choir offered up a solemn, AMEN). Let's not quibble anymore about whether MIPS is a worthy number or not. Let us be more concerned with obtaining, asking for, or generating the additional quantitative measures that can LEAD to a more realistic statement of "system performance". BTW – I downloaded AIBB and looked at its output, and found the numbers, and comparisons, interesting, but of no practical value to me. This is where a little mathematical statement of what is being measured would be beneficial to have, since I have no way of knowing just "what" is being measured. In some ways, I am kind of surprised that there aren't more mathematical theses in the area of computer system performance measurement. I would think that this would be right up their "alley"? OK – let's agree that you do not like using MIPS at all, but I do, with the realization of its shortcomings, and move on to more fun things, like, calculating Eigenvalues, or "have you gotten to level 100 in Lemmings, yet?". Amities 🙂 Real World:southern Illinois,USA Internet:ca0008 at siucvmb.siu.edu