Whoa, thanks. 368, huh? That's pretty impressive given the 1.9Ghz clock speed... By coincidence, the 'twitter.json' file was the one I was using as my slender data point.
Do note that at this stage the benchmark is so preliminary as to be largely meaningless - I haven't really done much more than eyeball the results. But as a preliminary data point, that seems to be a stronger showing clock-for-clock than the eMag one.
Do note that at this stage the benchmark is so preliminary as to be largely meaningless - I haven't really done much more than eyeball the results. But as a preliminary data point, that seems to be a stronger showing clock-for-clock than the eMag one.