Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 1 Nov 2000 00:39:21 +0100 | From | David Weinehall <> | Subject | Re: 2.2.18Pre Lan Performance Rocks! |
| |
On Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 01:21:03AM +0200, Matti Aarnio wrote: > On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 01:36:32PM -0800, Paul Menage wrote: > > On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Rik van Riel wrote: > > >Ummm, last I looked Linux held the Specweb99 record; > > >by a wide margin... > > > > ... but since then IBM/Zeus appear to have taken the lead: > > > > http://www.spec.org/osg/web99/results/res2000q3/ > > > > But they were using a somewhat beefier machine - has anyone got Tux > > SpecWeb99 figures for a 12 CPU, 64 GB, 12 NIC system? > > Good grief, what monster hardware... > > Those are (of course) system results which give some impression of > how much users can pull out of the box. > > Trying to make them a bit more comparable, scaling the number with > the number of processors: > > Zeus 12x600MHz IBM RS64-III 7288 SpecWEB99 ~ 607 SpecWEB99/CPU > Zeus 4x375MHz IBM Power3-II 2175 SpecWEB99 ~ 544 SpecWEB99/CPU > TUX 1.0 8x700MHz Pentium-III-Xeon 6387 SpecWEB99 ~ 798 SpecWeb99/CPU > IIS 2x800MHz Pentium-III-Xeon 1060 SpecWEB99 ~ 530 SpecWEB99/CPU > IIS 1x700MHz Pentium-III-Xeon 971 SpecWEB99 = 971 SpecWEB99/CPU > > Ok, more workers to do the thing, but each can achieve a bit less in > the IBM/Zeus case than TUX 1.0. The smaller IBM/Zeus test case with > older and slower processors yields almost as good results per CPU as > the big one. CPU clock speed increase has been lost into inter-CPU > collisions ? (that is, bad scaling) > > The IIS results are also interesting in their own. Single-CPU IIS > yields impressive PER CPU result, but adding second CPU is apparently > quite useless excercise. Hmm... Can't be.. As if that DUAL CPU > result is actually run in single-CPU mode. The difference can > directly be explained by the clock rate difference.. > (Surely the runners of that test *can't* make such an elementary > mistake!) > > > To be able to compare apples and apples, I would like to see single, > and dual CPU SpecWEB99 results with TUX. Then that apparent 20% > better "per CPU result" of the single-CPU IIS could not be explained > away with SMP inter-CPU communication overhead/collisions.
You mean like:
TUX 1.0 1x667MHz Pentium-IIIEB 1270 SpecWeb99 TUX 1.0 2x800MHz Pentium-III-Xeon 2200 SpecWeb99 TUX 1.0 4x700MHz Pentium-III-Xeon 4200 SpecWeb99
(Check out quarter 2 instead of q3)
Truly impressive figures imho.
/David Weinehall _ _ // David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\ // Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky // \> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |