The second example is a 2D mesh of Chair (Fig. 2) modeled by 3D surfaces. Since generation of 2D meshes (even in 3D) is computationally not so demanding relatively larger meshes have been generated. The coarser one consists of 57775 nodes and 58738 elements, the finer one comprises 135560 nodes and 138984 elements. The smaller mesh has been generated using from 1 to 6 processors on SP2 and from 2 to 6 processors on Paramid. The larger mesh has been obtained using from 1 to 8 processors on SP2 and from 4 to 9 processors on Paramid. Although these meshes are large enough to be also processed on higher number of processors this was not possible because of topological simplicity of the model with respect to the level of domain decomposition being applied. The speedup achieved on SP2 and Paramid is depicted in Figures 5 and 8 respectively. The summary of results is also provided in Tables 3 and 4 for SP2 and in Tables 9 and 10 for Paramid. Although accurate quantitative comparison of the results is not possible because of indirectly calculated speedups on Paramid the profiles of the speedup achieved on SP2 and Paramid are again quite similar except for the saturation phase in case of coarser mesh which seems again to occur earlier in the case of SP2. Note that the speedups for coarser mesh on Paramid are the same regardless which way they have been evaluated.