[Beowulf] SPEC CPU 2006 released
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Joe Landman landman at scalableinformatics.comMon Sep 4 08:36:17 PDT 2006
- Previous message: [Beowulf] SPEC CPU 2006 released
- Next message: [Beowulf] SPEC CPU 2006 released
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Robert G. Brown wrote: > This, in turn, was supposed to stimulate a discussion on whether or not > benchmarks of this sort "need" to be licensed and controlled (I would > argue a resounding "no") and if so controlled by whom, to prevent vendor I agree. Benchmarks, and all data around them are an example of a need for transparency. Without such transparency, well, you never really know what you have. Unfortunately benchmark design and reporting is rather suspect as well. Anyone advocating taking a large multi-dimensional space and reducing it to a zero-dimensional quantity by means of a non-intuitive averaging scheme ought to think hard about the vast quantities of information being destroyed by such a process. IMO that is. > abuse or benchmark drift or the healthy discussion, criticism, and > modification that results in a true open source process. This might > have lead to discussing e.g. the top500 rankings and linpack and other > (more open) macro benchmarks, whether the "member organizations" of SPEC Heh... some of us have gotten together to try to get something reasonable (http://www.scalableinformatics.com/bbs), and completely open source created for LS benchmarking. All tests, test cases, and code is OSS, and specifically the stuff being used by researchers is used. We have had lots of people pull it down (over 1000) in the 2 years it has been out, but alas there seems to be little interest in the community to contributing test cases and code snippets, and lots of interest in simply consuming baseline results. So work on the subsequent versions takes a long time as it is done in one persons "copious" spare time. > are above reproach and have no self-interest to promote (Oh wait! The > member list, who doubtless pony up the actual cash that runs the > non-profit, is made up of all the top COMPANIES that sell HARDWARE? No > hint of self-interest there...;-). Hmmm.... we recently responded to a government RFP where they "require" runs on the hardware from the spec suite. [soap box] This is counter productive IMO as the spec suite really doesn't do much for you in terms of meaningful performance measurements. Does about the same as Linpack/HPL. Yeah, some people argue otherwise, and compiler vendors and hardware OEMs/resellers work really hard to put out great benchmark data. I don't believe such data is terribly meaningful, and customers who rely upon it for purchase decisions may wind up making decisions in part based upon "data" which has little intrinsic value to the tasks at hand. The most important benchmark is the one that uses the same code you use in the way you are going to use it. Anything else is an entropy generator. [/soap box] -- Joseph Landman, Ph.D Founder and CEO Scalable Informatics LLC, email: landman at scalableinformatics.com web : http://www.scalableinformatics.com phone: +1 734 786 8423 fax : +1 734 786 8452 cell : +1 734 612 4615
- Previous message: [Beowulf] SPEC CPU 2006 released
- Next message: [Beowulf] SPEC CPU 2006 released
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
