Re: OT: Wheeeeee! New PSpice Benchmarks
From: Ken Smith (kensmith_at_green.rahul.net)
Date: 08/24/04
- Next message: Jim Thompson: "Re: Wheeeeee! New PSpice Benchmarks"
- Previous message: Active8: "Re: Wheeeeee! New PSpice Benchmarks"
- In reply to: /* frank */: "Re: OT: Wheeeeee! New PSpice Benchmarks"
- Next in thread: Keith Williams: "Re: OT: Wheeeeee! New PSpice Benchmarks"
- Reply: Keith Williams: "Re: OT: Wheeeeee! New PSpice Benchmarks"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:58:22 +0000 (UTC)
In article <mn.c1f97d4831c16dbd.15428@spamyourselfagainstawall>,
/* frank */ <__frank__@despammed.com> wrote:
>Dopo dura riflessione, Jim Thompson ha scritto :
>
>> 2.175 times faster !!!
>
>Faster time - surely - isn't due to 64 bit:
>nor WinXP neither pspice.exe are 64 bit ;)
You may be wrong. A 64 bit bus can transfer more instructions per cycle
and move a "double" in one stroke. Since the software has to do a lot of
both, it could be the 64 bit nature of the machine that helped to gain the
speed.
It could also be like the new navigation system we just installed. They
got a 25% increase in performance just by changing to a synthetic oil on
the relative bearings.
-- -- kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge
- Next message: Jim Thompson: "Re: Wheeeeee! New PSpice Benchmarks"
- Previous message: Active8: "Re: Wheeeeee! New PSpice Benchmarks"
- In reply to: /* frank */: "Re: OT: Wheeeeee! New PSpice Benchmarks"
- Next in thread: Keith Williams: "Re: OT: Wheeeeee! New PSpice Benchmarks"
- Reply: Keith Williams: "Re: OT: Wheeeeee! New PSpice Benchmarks"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]