On Sun, 4 Sep 2005 21:59:10 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In either case, I wouldn't want to extrapolate Xeon Irwindale results > to all Intel X86 chips, let alone AMD. /usr/portage/app-benchmarks has > several items in it. Does anybody know which ones have floating-point > tests? > There are many floating-point tests. You choose by what you want to prove. And an example - [MN] sys-cluster/hpl (1.0-r2): HPL - A Portable Implementation of the High-Performance Linpack Benchmark for Distributed-Memory Computers Linpack is pretty standard but only compare linpack results to linpack results. AIM5 and AIM7 a different set. SpecFP, yet a different set. Floating point tests are meaningless outside of themselves. If your apps happens to run the same type of setup as a specific floating point test, then there is meaning. If you app has a lot of other things going on, no floating point test is going be give you an idea of how the app is going to perform. > Tinfoil-hat-theory... have you noticed that Microsoft just loves to > use Xeons, especially dual-Xeons, in their "get the facts" propaganda? > I wonder if they've found a problem with gcc's optimizations for Xeon, > and are exploiting that problem to bias all their comparisons. > No. nothing as creative as that. It's well known that Intel's C/C++ compiler is better at some things than others. Microsoft, probably, just happens to use Intel's compiler for WinXX while "forgetting" to use it in place of gcc. If you want to prove that Opterons are faster than Xeons, you'll buy a copy of the PathScale compiler for the Opterons and use Intel's compiler for the Xeons. Bob - -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
