mxrk писал(а): 11.09.2021,22:10
а смысл? чтобы что-то опровергать я бы хотел сначала увидеть результаты тестов с провалом Pentium-Pro
Марк, тебя за язык никто не тянул, ты сам вызвался "опровергать".
Не надо теперь включать заднюю.
И про "открытый доступ" ты сам ляпнул.
Причем два раза:
mxrk писал(а): 11.09.2021,22:10
Опять же, тесты PII vs Pmmx тебя устроят? они уж точно в свободном доступе.
Ну вот уж "эти точно в открытом доступе" и покажи.
Babasha писал(а): 11.09.2021,22:15
По памяти - не «провальными», а сопоставимыми с «классическими» П1 котрые стоили в разы дешевле. Далее шел смешанный код - который тоже «скатывался» к сопоставимому на мгц к П1. И только на чистом 32битном коде оно отрабатывало свои деньги под «чистыми» 32битными ОС - WinNT, OS/2, юниксы…
Вот это очень похоже на правду.
Достаточно развернуто описано в англоязычной вики:
Performance
Despite being advanced for the time, the Pentium Pro's out-of-order register renaming architecture had trouble running 16-bit code and mixed code (8-bit with 16-bit (8/16), or 16-bit with 32-bit (16/32), as using partial registers cause frequent pipeline flushing.[9] Specific use of partial registers was then a common performance optimization, as it incurred no performance penalty on pre-P6 Intel processors; also, the dominant operating systems at the time of the Pentium Pro's release were 16-bit DOS, and mixed 16/32-bit Windows 3.1x and Windows 95 (although the latter requires a 32-bit 80386 CPU, much of its code is still 16-bit for performance reasons, such as USER.exe). This, with the high cost of Pentium Pro systems, led to tepid sales among PC buyers at the time. To fully use the Pentium Pro's P6 microarchitecture, a fully 32-bit operating system is needed, such as Windows NT, Linux, Unix, or OS/2. The performance issues on legacy code were later partly mitigated by Intel with the Pentium II.
Compared to RISC microprocessors, the Pentium Pro, when introduced, slightly outperformed the fastest RISC microprocessors on integer performance when running the SPECint95 benchmark,[10] but floating-point performance was significantly lower, half that of some RISC microprocessors.[10] The Pentium Pro's integer performance lead disappeared rapidly, first overtaken by the MIPS Technologies R10000 in January 1996, and then by Digital Equipment Corporation's EV56 variant of the Alpha 21164.[11]
Reviewers quickly noted the very slow writes to video memory as the weak spot of the P6 platform, with performance here being as low as 10% of an identically clocked Pentium system in benchmarks such as VIDSPEED. Methods to circumvent this included setting VESA drawing to system memory instead of video memory in games such as Quake,[12] and later on utilities such as FASTVID emerged, which could double performance in certain games by enabling the write combining features of the CPU.[13][14] memory type range registers (MTRRs) are set automatically by Windows video drivers starting from ~1997, and there the improved cache/memory subsystem and FPU performance caused it to outclass the Pentium clock-for-clock in the emerging 3D games of the mid–to–late 1990s, particularly when using NT4. However, its lack of MMX implementation reduces performance in multimedia applications that made use of those instructions.
копия 
