On 11 March 2017 at 03:25, Emilio G. Cota <c...@braap.org> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 12:48:31 +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: >> Given the scale on the LHS is from 1.74 to 1.88 my guess is that the >> variation is in large part noise and the major thing is "our fp >> performance is bounded by softfloat, which doesn't change and is >> always very slow". > > It isn't "measurement noise" -- if you look at the PNGs the measurements > are very stable (all points have error bars): http://imgur.com/a/nF7Ls > > It's true that performance here varies very little. This is just the > result of Amdahl's law, as you point out. (upon re-reading your message, > I see that perhaps what you meant by "noise" is exactly this.)
Yes, sorry, I wasn't really using the right terminology there. I just meant that the release-to-release variation is not as significant as it appears from the graph, because the LHS axis scale is covering such a small range. thanks -- PMM
