On 22.12.11 11:56, Igor Mozolevsky wrote:
On 22 December 2011 05:54, Daniel Kalchev<dan...@digsys.bg> wrote:
Of course, it is meaningless, the Ferrari will lose big time in the fuel
consumption comparison! I believe it will also lose the price comparison as
well. Not to speak the availability comparison.
That's an oxymoron, right? The comparison cannot be meaningless---the
reality is F430 will indeed use up more fuel than Prius. If a
benchmark demonstrates a true reality, how can that benchmark be
possibly meaningless??? Same benchmark might be irrelevant to someone
who wants to know how fast they can get from A to B, but irrelevant is
not a synonym for meaningless!
That benchmark is especially meaningless and a waste of time, because by
design the Prius is constructed to consume 'less' fuel at the cost of
lower engine power and the Ferrari is designed to waste fuel for the
sake of high engine power.
Of course, you can compare them, but this is not exactly benchmark.
As for how fast to get from point A to point B. If you observe speed
limits, that will depend only on the pilot, no? :)
Both cars are sufficiently faster than the imposed speed limits.
The same can be said for the FreeBSD and the Linux platforms. Today.
Years ago, Linux was much worse, but they.. hm.. learned. :)
On commodity hardware, you can expect about the same results from both
OS. There will be differences due to drivers, different optimizations etc.
On very specific hardware, such as systems with many CPUs and lots of
memory, you may see one better than the other -- this in most cases will
be relevant to tuning, but also to overall system architecture.
Any 'benchmark' has a goal. You first define the goal and then measure how
different contenders achieve it. Reaching the goal may have several
measurable metrics, that you will use to later declare the winner in each.
Besides, you need to define a baseline and be aware of what theoretical
max/min values are possible.
Treating a benchmark as a binary win/lose is rather naive, it's not a
competition, and (I hope) no serious person ever does that. A proper
benchmark shows true strength and weaknesses so than a well-informed
intelligent decision can be taken by an individual according to that
individual's needs. The caveat, of course, is making your methodology
clear and methods repeatable!
Err... a benchmark produces metrics. It does not produce conclusions. Or
at least, should not :)
It takes context and understanding of both the subject and methodology
used to draw any conclusion out of particular benchmark.
No benchmark shows strengths and weaknesses -- these are subject of
interpretation and any 'score' you have in a benchmark might be the
result of poor benchmark design and/or implementation.
You may make an very "scientific", well documented and repeatable
benchmark, such as this one:
time dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null
.. then optimize your particular OS to run it at the highest possible
rate... and so what? Do you know what this benchmark measures? :)
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"