Apple Reference & Presen…rary 8 (Internal Edition)/Apple R&P Lib Internal v8.0.iso/3-Presentations/Apple Computer Inc./Industry Competition/ROMs/Industry/Benchmarks-IIci - Portable

Text File | 1990-06-24 | 4KB | 82 lines

Apple Confidential / Need to Know

From:  Dave Garr


NSTL Benchmarks the Macintosh IIci and Portable

Apple’s Summary.  NSTL performed application benchmarks comparing the Macintosh
IIci and Portable with competitive machines.  NSTL found the Macintosh IIci was
overall about 50% faster than IBM’s and Compaq’s 25-MHz machines.  NSTL found
that the overall performance of the Macintosh Portable was above the 286
portables but below the Zenith 386 portable.


Introduction

National Software Testing Laboratories (NSTL), a third party testing
organization, performed benchmarks comparing the Macintosh IIci and Portable
with competitive machines.  NSTL ran many different tests for three
applications, and then summarized the results for each application by totaling
the individual times.  The three applications tested are available in both
Macintosh and Windows versions.  This document lists NSTL’s results, and then
concludes with Apple’s analysis of these results.


Macintosh IIci—Not All 25-MHz Systems Created Equal

The Macintosh IIci was faster than the 25-MHz IBM PS/2 Model 70 A21 for every
application that NSTL benchmarked.

Even though both machines offer 25-MHz processors, the Macintosh IIci was
consistently faster than the comparable IBM system.

NSTL also benchmarked the IIci using Apple’s IIci Cache Card and 8bit Video
Card.  NSTL's benchmarks showed that adding the Cache Card to the IIci
increased its speed by an average of 23%, a very significant performance boost
for power users.  NSTL also found that adding the Video Card increased speed by
7%.


Macintosh Portable—Performance Beat 286 Portables

The competitive portable that has received the most publicity lately is the
Compaq SLT/286.

The Macintosh Portable easily beat the SLT/286 in the Excel and Illustrator
benchmarks (it was almost twice as fast).  Both were nearly equal in the
PageMaker benchmark.


Apple’s Summary

Positioning of the IIci.  NSTL compared the performance of the IIci with the
PS/2 Model 70 and the Compaq 386/25.  Averaging the results of all three
applications shows that the IIci was about 50% faster than each of these other
25-MHz machines.  Adding the cache card to the IIci makes it about 80% faster
than each of the other systems.  This demonstrates that factors other than
clock speed help determine performance, such as the optimization of system
software for running a graphical environment.

Positioning of the Portable.  Along with the Compaq, NSTL also ran benchmarks
on other leading 286 portables (Zenith’s SupersPort 286 and Toshiba’s T1600) as
well as Zenith’s TurbosPort 386.  When all three benchmarks are averaged, the
performance of the Macintosh Portable was above the 286 portables but below the
Zenith 386 portable.  Therefore, the Macintosh Portable should be positioned as
offering performance (in a graphical environment) between 286 and 386
portables.

Macintosh optimized for graphical environments.  When computers run in a
graphics environment, they experience overhead such as windows management and
handling various fonts.  The Macintosh was designed from the start to give
optimum performance in a graphics environment.  When PC compatibles run a
graphics environment, such as Windows, they are usually slower than Macintosh
systems (when both are using comparable processors).  This is borne out by
NSTL’s results.  The Macintosh IIci and Portable were overall faster than
comparable competitors when both were running the same graphics-based
applications.  Since graphical environments are the industry trend, we believe
that this Macintosh advantage will become increasingly important.