[Beowulf] Benchmarking?

Philippe Blaise philippe.blaise at cea.fr
Thu Jul 29 00:56:18 PDT 2004

daniel.kidger at quadrics.com wrote:

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Jack C [mailto:jack at crepinc.com]
>>Sent: 28 July 2004 19:58
>>To: Jack C
>>Cc: beowulf at beowulf.org
>>Subject: Re: [Beowulf] Benchmarking?
>>I was just told about linpack, and that it was good. And 
>>apperantly there is 
>>an MPI implementation thereof, but I sure can't find it... 
>>the MPI standard 
>>site is not very informative. :(
>>Anyone know where to find that, or any other good ones?
>Linpack is ubiquitous - just look for 'xhpl' in Google.
>It will take you to http://www.netlib.org/benchmark/hpl/
>Unfortunately this benchmark does not test all aspects of a high performance cluster. Most notably it doesn't really stress MPI, such that most high performance interconnect solutions (IBA, Myrinet, Quadrics et al. [*])  would give fairly similar performance figures.
>ps. [*] yes I do work for one of those vendors
>Dr. Dan Kidger, Quadrics Ltd.      daniel.kidger at quadrics.com
>One Bridewell St., Bristol, BS1 2AA, UK         0117 915 5505
>----------------------- www.quadrics.com --------------------> 
>Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org
>To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
Everyone knows that linpack perf is more or less equal to the number of 
cpus x gemm perf,
that's why cheap linux clusters are compared to Quadrics clusters, or 
even X1, SX6 machines !
But what could we suggest to definitively replace this old and stupid 
and political benchmark ?
may be a boycott ?

  Philippe Blaise.

More information about the Beowulf mailing list