Um, because you have been saying that the calibration concept, which does just this, is a bad idea?
Because that is exactly the outcome that occurs with the calibration concept, and that is what I have been saying since I wrote that paper. And you were against the idea when it was mine. Or is it a good idea now for some other reason? By the way, even though you are proposing the same thing that I was, I still think it is a good idea. Ooops ... did I just kill it? On Oct 2, 2009, at 9:15 PM, Lynn W. Taylor wrote: > Martin wrote: > >> 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. > > Just thinking out loud here. > > Whetstones and Dhrystones share a problem with every other synthetic > benchmark: they're synthetic. > > So, in a sense, we've got a 1980's era benchmark, but the true "index" > is early 2000's hardware and how it completes the "old" benchmark. > > Which isn't the same as indexing to late-1980's hardware -- we're > indexing to early-BOINC-era hardware, as measured on an old "Etalon." > > No problem. > > Calculating the benchmark * time credit is right straight from the > definition. I'm not sure we need to index it at all. It may be a > little odd, but it's odd by definition. > > What if we had a fleet of designated machines that make up the > standard? > They'd be purchased to be representative of the current fleet: some > fast, some slow, the only criteria is that they all be "measurable" > machines -- no GPUs. Some AMD, some Intel. Atoms to i7's. > > Calculate the "benchmark * time" credit, compare that to the average > number of FLOPs and you've got the conversion factor based on your > reference fleet. > > Okay, now we've got our dozen reference machines. Let's find a few > dozen machines "out there" that behave identically. More because > there > needs to be a way to detect changes. > > Now we have a reference fleet without having to own it. > > We've got an average cobblestone credit for that group calculated > using > the definition benchmark * time. Compare that to the average number > of > FLOPs and we've now got the same value based on our "virtual" fleet. > > Which is nearly the same as what Eric's script does. Probably > within a > percent or two. > _______________________________________________ > boinc_dev mailing list > boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu > http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev > To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and > (near bottom of page) enter your email address. _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
