Is that only for an iBook, or is it a more generic change?
Hugh
BenH wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2000, hughc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Of course, if disk-intensiveness is a large part of the compiling
> process, you
> >probably need to spend a fair amount of time with hdparm before it works a
On Mon, Jan 10, 2000, hughc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Of course, if disk-intensiveness is a large part of the compiling
process, you
>probably need to spend a fair amount of time with hdparm before it works at
>it's
>best. According to it's built-in benchmarks, disk throughput practically
>doub
Of course, if disk-intensiveness is a large part of the compiling process, you
probably need to spend a fair amount of time with hdparm before it works at it's
best. According to it's built-in benchmarks, disk throughput practically
doubled
on my 400 mhz "Bronze" laptop when I set it to autotune.
On Mon, 10 Jan 2000, David Welton wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 05:17:02AM -0600, Shiryu wrote:
> > I have powerbook 333Mhz, and it runs like 1/2 of the speed of my PII
> > 400 Mhz, wasnt G3 supose to be much faster? ( I tested compilations
> > on Debian, using time command).
>
> Compiling is n
On Mon, 10 Jan 2000, Kevin Puetz wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > Compiling is not a very good way of benchmarking a processor - there
> > are too many factors involved...
>
> Espescially when you throw in the (usually) limited RAM and slow,
> low-power-consumption hard drives that laptops u
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Compiling is not a very good way of benchmarking a processor - there
> are too many factors involved...
Espescially when you throw in the (usually) limited RAM and slow,
low-power-consumption hard drives that laptops use.
On Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 10:57:19AM -0600, David Welton wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 05:17:02AM -0600, Shiryu wrote:
>
> > I have powerbook 333Mhz, and it runs like 1/2 of the speed of my PII
> > 400 Mhz, wasnt G3 supose to be much faster? ( I tested compilations
> > on Debian, using time comma
How do you quantify "1/2 of the speed"? Console scrolling? I know that
console is very slow on PPC, mostly because there is no hardware support of
text in the
Framebuffer (as I understand it).
With accelerated X the X server speed is quite good.
Have you tested integer and fpu throughput?
Hu
Hugh Caley wrote:
>
> You're right, and I apologize. "Oops!"
> > --
> > I believe the technical term is "Oops!"
The sig was generated randomly :)
Michel
--
The computer revolution is over. The computers won.
__
Mich
On Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 05:17:02AM -0600, Shiryu wrote:
> I have powerbook 333Mhz, and it runs like 1/2 of the speed of my PII
> 400 Mhz, wasnt G3 supose to be much faster? ( I tested compilations
> on Debian, using time command).
Compiling is not a very good way of benchmarking a processor - the
Hugh Caley wrote:
> How do you quantify "1/2 of the speed"? Console scrolling? I know that
> console is very slow on PPC, mostly because there is no hardware support of
> text in the Framebuffer (as I understand it).
It depends, e.g. the pm2fb has very fast accelerated scrolling.
> Shiryu wrot
On Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 05:17:02AM -0600, Shiryu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have powerbook 333Mhz, and it runs like 1/2 of the speed of my PII
> 400 Mhz, wasnt G3 supose to be much faster? ( I tested compilations
> on Debian, using time command).
>
> can someone explain me? I am testing this laptop. is
Hi,
I have powerbook 333Mhz, and it runs like 1/2 of the speed of my PII 400 Mhz,
wasnt G3 supose to be much faster? ( I tested compilations on Debian, using
time command).
can someone explain me? I am testing this laptop. is not mine yet, but its a
great deal.
I apreciated some advice. than
13 matches
Mail list logo
