Josef W. Segur wrote: > On 1 Oct 2009 at 11:54, Richard wrote: > [...] >> So, Eric's script will *not* alter the value of the cobblestone over time >> merely because machines get, on average, faster: in principle, both >> flopcounts and benchmarks should increase in proportion. >> >> In practice, architectural changes and more efficient processor designs will >> mean that flopcounts increase more rapidly than benchmarks with >> technological advances (already evident in the different flop / benchmark >> ratios of Intel and AMD processors). So Paul's predicted behaviour is real, >> but it's a second-order effect and *not* an automatic, deliberate, design >> intention of the script. >> >> The other problem with the script is that will be thrown into total >> confusion if GPU processing ever approaches the median. At the time Eric [...] > > As usual, Richard's observations are on target. I'll add a few of > my own hoping to do as well. [...] > the same deflationary aspect as Eric's script. The host with the > least additional capability over what the benchmarks measure made > the highest claim, the host with the most capability finished much > earlier than the benchmarks alone could predict and made the lowest > claim. The median host of the three established what was granted. > > The benchmarks are effectively locked into 1970's technology when they > were originally designed. As such they provide a basic measurement > which indicates the minimum capability of the host. So long as they're > used with that in mind, such as for an initial estimate of how much > work to fetch, they serve admirably.
Now that is what I think is the clearest summary yet of the Boinc benchmarks and the variable proportionality to present day (FL)OPS. Hence, reference against /present day/ hardware to allow for the new performance enhancements in the newer hardware?... The present day reference can be still calibrated to stay in line with whatever older hardware was used for the reference system as newer hardware is brought into use. Note that we can stay with the Cobblestones benchmark as is. However, we can also benchmark the (in lab) reference computer with any other benchmarks of interest and by virtue of the propagated calibration across all hosts, we will be able to say something meaningful about how that benchmark relates to Boinc as a whole. Regards, Martin -- -------------------- Martin Lomas m_boincdev ml1 co uk.ddSPAM.dd -------------------- _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
