At 11:28 PM -0700 7/15/99, J W wrote:
>Oh, I was way off in my speed measurement on my celeron, it took about 63
>hours for a packet. Vs. the 8 hours on the dual PII 450. That's about 8
>times faster. Say that his 450 actually achieved the equivalent of a PII
>900 (which it can't), scale down by three, a PII 300 should be about 24
>hours. My Celeron 300 is 63 hours, so that makes it equivalent to something
>like a PII 115. Can the small cache really cut my speed down to a third?
I was under the impression that all seti@home packets are not created equal, or at least that the analyser might take longer depending on the patterns found. If this is true, these packets don't exactly make good benchmarks.
-- Jason Spencer email@example.com http://www.ualberta.ca/~spencer/