Performance Evaluation of Microcomputers with Emphasis on the IBM PC/AT

W. Bell,T. E. Bell

Abstract:The growing use of microcomputers has led to interest in their relative performance. Many of the tasks now being assigned to personal computers have previously been assigned to minicomputers or mainframes, so performance capabilities as well as functional capabilities must be considered in selecting both the computers and the tasks to be assigned to them. The IBM PC/AT is one of the best examples of a new generation of computer that offers significantly greater power than its predecessors, so interest is particularly acute in determining its performance characteristics. Experience has proven to performance analysts the danger of accepting a Single test as an indicator of computer performance. Al though some comparisons of mainframes and minicomputers still consist of running a single arbitrary application program on each candidate, the inappropriateness of this technique seems to be understood by the vast majority of performance analysts who benchmark large computers. Nevertheless, microcomputer systems are frequentlY compared with this same inadequate approach, and people appear to ignore the impressive limitations of the Sieve of Eratosthenes (or some other Single benchmark) as a general indicator of performance. We have measured several characteristics of IBM microcomputers from the PCjr through the PC/AT to provide an initial baseline for comparisons of the machines. After describing the benchmark orientation we adopted, we present test resul ts for the computational power of each candidate when executing interpreted BASIC programs. Similar results are then provided for compiled Pascal programs running on the primary processors, and then on processors augmented with co-processors. Results are then given for different clock speeds and wait states 1n compatible PCs. Finally, we present benchmark results for different versions of the compiler. BENCH!!ARKS ~enchmarks can be meaningfully divided ~nto two categories: real jobs extracted from real workloads, and synthetic benChmarks that don' t do any real work while they exercise the system. The first approach is attractive when the objective is to find the best system for a specific set of tasks that currently runs on some other computer. The second 50 approach is more appropriate to si tuations in which the application environment is not specified in detail (e.g., general evaluations to be reported in the professional literature). To use the first approach appropriately, a comprehensive study must be done to indicate the important aspects of the system requiring testing. This study is needed because selection should be based on comparative values that predict performance …