This brings up an interesting question (Well at least to me it is). I
notice that you refer to the iteration time "going down" as an expected
event. Are you saying that a new CPU is expect to get faster (If ever so
slightly) after an initial "Burn in" time??? Perhaps that is a bit of
common knowledge I have never heard of. Can someone explain this in
greater detail?

Thank You,

Chuck

On Wed, 13 Jan 1999, Leu Enterprises Unlimited wrote:

> 
> Greetings!
> 
> Aside from it's normal uses, I've been looking at using mprime as
> a QA and benchmarking tool. 
> 
> This is particularly important for overclocked Beowulf clusters, 
> where reliability is a must. And given that the price of these
> is now so cheap (with a Gigaflop being achieved for under $10,000),
> adaquate Q.A. procedures are a must. Re: my observations on
> www.supercomputer.org.
> 
> I've recently noticed something interesting. Namely, with the so-called
> effects of "burning-in" a CPU via mprime's torture test, and the
> resulting effects on the CPU speed (as determined by the mprime
> time test).
> 
> On one CPU, after two days worth of burn-in, the time required to
> complete 100 iterations on the stock number went down, as I would expect.
> 
> On a second CPU, the time actually *increased*. From 1 day, 18 hours,
> and 55 minutes, to 1d 19h 13m!
> 
> So this leads me to wonder if what I'm seeing is real, or whether
> mprime is really sensitive enough to be used here. The O.S. being 
> used is Linux.
> 
> If mprime is indeed seeing some real effects here, I think people 
> need to be aware of it. Or even if it's not suitable for this, people 
> should also know.
> 
> If anyone knowledgeable would care to comment about mprime's suitability
> for Q.A. and/or performance measurements, I would appreciate it.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
>       -dwight-
> 

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: WWW: http://www.silverlink.net/poke : Boycott Microsot                :
: E-Mail:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]      : http://www.vcnet.com/bms        :
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Reply via email to