[lkml]   [2005]   [Jul]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [ANNOUNCE] Interbench v0.20 - Interactivity benchmark
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 21:57, David Lang wrote:
> this looks very interesting, however one thing that looks odd to me in
> this is the thought of comparing the results for significantly different
> hardware.
> for some of the loads you really are going to be independant of the speed
> of the hardware (burn, compile, etc will use whatever you have) however
> for others (X, audio, video) saying that they take a specific percentage
> of the cpu doesn't seem right.
> if I have a 400MHz cpu each of these will take a much larger percentage of
> the cpu to get the job done then if I have a 4GHz cpu for example.
> for audio and video this would seem to be a fairly simple scaleing factor
> (or just doing a fixed amount of work rather then a fixed percentage of
> the CPU worth of work), however for X it is probably much more complicated
> (is the X load really linearly random in how much work it does, or is it
> weighted towards small amounts with occasional large amounts hitting? I
> would guess that at least beyond a certin point the liklyhood of that much
> work being needed would be lower)

Actually I don't disagree. What I mean by hardware changes is more along the
lines of changing the hard disk type in the same setup. That's what I mean by
careful with the benchmarking. Taking the results from an athlon XP and
comparing it to an altix is silly for example.

[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-07-12 14:13    [W:0.101 / U:9.916 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site