Comparison of R3000 and Intel 386 and 486's 
Author Message
 Comparison of R3000 and Intel 386 and 486's


:
: Can anyone send me "speed comparisons" between R3000 and Intel's 386/486
: chips? (yeah, I know, ......).

I just wrote FORTH (assembler, interpreter, compiler) for the R3000
(actually fort the MIPS RISC family). I did this for the i486 (and
386) protected mode in April, so my memories are fresh.

I'll compare them in the 33MHz version, running out of cache, numbers
are in clocks. Number in brackets are if You cannot fill the delay slot
(which is _rarely_ the case)

                        i486            Rx000          
Memory fetches:         1               1(2)
Register moves:         1               1
Arithmetics
  out of regs:          2               1
  out of memory         3               1+1
Jumps                   3               1(2)
Subroutine call/ret     6               6, sometimes 4
Memory moves:           (5?6?7)         6       ( per 32-bit word)
Loops                   (5?)            2
Stack operations        (1?2)/word      1/word + 1              
Multiply/divide         11mul/?div      12m/35d +1-2 for getting 1-2 results to regs
FPU +/-                 ?               2s/3d (R3000)
FPU *                   ?               4-single, 5-double
FPU /                   ?               12s/19d
moves to/from FPU       (10?)           1 + 1-2 if convert is needed.
Cache miss penalty to
        secondary cash  3               no such (R3000)
                                        ? (R4000)
Memory access out
        of cache        memory and bus dependent    

The ?s are lapses of memory.

The R3000 can acomodate 32+32 Kb cache, which _greatly_ helps.
The i486 has 8 Kb. (which uses somewhat better, because of the shorter instructions size)

The larger cache on the Rx000 allows it to execute out of cache for the greatest
part of the time. If The i486 runs out of cache, it slows 2-4 times.
Rx000 has a lot of registers, which act as a very selective and effective cache.

The actual gain depends a lot on the type of task the processor is running.
One should consider the pre{*filter*} of operation in his application.
For mine - FORTH, which is a very structured and stack-intensive language,
I find it somewhere between 1.5 and 3.
For one of my scientific tasks (Monte Carlo simulation with lots of pointers and
tables >8K and <32K), it is about 5-7.

For integer multiply/divide the i486 is a lot more conviniant. it has a 64/32=32
bit divide mode, which makes 96(128)/32=64(96) division of very high precision
integers a piece of cake. I love this instructions. On the Rx000 You must
use the brute-force binary divide algorithm, which is slow as hell (comparatively).

For Float, I think, that the R3000 is a bit faster, but less than 2 times.

I'd be interested to hear other comments, especially from folks, who has
programmed both processors.

-- Penio.



Sun, 04 Jun 1995 19:08:36 GMT  
 
 [ 1 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Intel 386/486 timing

2. Fortran on 386/486 PC's

3. Intel 486 vs AMD 486

4. Incompatability with 386/486 computers

5. Incompatiblity with 386/486 computers

6. Digitalk Smalltalk/V 286 on 386-486-PII?

7. Forth for bare 386/486?

8. 32-bit Forth for 386/486 ?

9. MIT CScheme 386/486 version: looking for it

10. Modula-2 on 386/486

11. MMU-programming on an 386/486

12. Re : 386/486 Question

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software