comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » Re: AMD CPU - pentium way faster? (should be IDL on win2000 faster than IDL on linux)

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: AMD CPU - pentium way faster? (should be IDL on win2000 faster than IDL on linux)

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: AMD CPU - pentium way faster? (should be IDL on win2000 faster than IDL on linux) [message #29085]

Thu, 31 January 2002 13:04

Mark Hadfield
Messages: 783
Registered: May 1995

Senior Member

"Robert Stockwell" <rgs1967@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3C59AAA6.4040802@hotmail.com...
> Average time for time_test.pro = ...

Isn't time_test deprecated these days in favour of time_test2? (The reason
being, I believe, that the tests in the former are too small to be
meaningful.) Time_test2 is the only one mentioned in the help file. There's
also a time_test3 that seems to be the same as time_test2 except that some
tests have been increased in size. JD's IDLSPEC2 benchmark uses time_test3
so perhaps we should standardise on this.

---
Mark Hadfield
m.hadfield@niwa.co.nz http://katipo.niwa.co.nz/~hadfield
National Institute for Water and Atmospheric Research

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		Re: AMD CPU - pentium way faster? (should be IDL on win2000 faster than IDL on linux) By: Mark Hadfield on Thu, 31 January 2002 13:04
		Re: AMD CPU - pentium way faster? (should be IDL on win2000 faster than IDL on linux) By: Robert Stockwell on Thu, 31 January 2002 12:35
		Re: AMD CPU - pentium way faster? (should be IDL on win2000 faster than IDL on linux) By: John-David T. Smith on Tue, 05 February 2002 15:14
		Re: AMD CPU - pentium way faster? (should be IDL on win2000 faster than IDL on linux) By: Robert Stockwell on Fri, 01 February 2002 06:23

Previous Topic:	Re: representive digits
Next Topic:	test

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Wed Oct 08 17:01:03 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00415 seconds