4/19/2023 0 Comments Cpu benchmark test![]() A single stable platform must be used to limit variances.The Linux CPU Benchmarks must not be proprietary in nature.The Linux CPU Benchmarks must be simple for a user to reproduce.In creating the new CPU benchmarking suite we decided to use a few key principles to guide: Key Principles for STH CPU Benchmarking in Linux The 0.43s was driven more by errors preventing successful completion rather than actual speed. We manually re-ran crafty to see a full log of the results and saw the following:īad string = “3r1k2/4npp1/1ppr3p/p6P/P2PPPP1/1NR5/5K2/2R5” Example 2: Crafty Chess BenchmarkĪlso we saw an example of the pts/crafty chess benchmark finishing faster on a Raspberry Pi than dual CPU systems. Suffice to say that is a very short burst of speed. ![]() does mention this in their documentation. Phoronix will re-do the test results until it achieves a lower standard deviation but if one loops the test the t1.micro will stay consistently in the 5.7 signs/s range and not revert back to 57. One can clearly see the first result is ten times higher than the others. The Amazon EC2 t1.micro instance’s “burst” CPU speed caused pts/openssl numbers to be inflated due to the initial run: Two easy examples can be found when looking at both the Amazon EC2 t1.micro pts/openssl numbers and the Raspberry Pi pts/crafty results. It is generally a great platform to make benchmarking simple, but we found a few data points that suggested we needed to make our own benchmark suite. Given the scop of the benchmarking we wanted to do Phoronix Test Suite was a leading candidate. In terms of performance deltas, we have seen deltas where the Raspberry Pi took over two hours for each test run while the dual Intel Xeon E5-2690 machine took 19 seconds. In terms of scope the lowest end system has been a Raspberry Pi and the highest-end system has been a dual Intel Xeon E5-2690 machine. Over the past few weeks we have run over 10,000 benchmark runs on a significant number of recent systems. It is also a request for feedback as we do want this to be a collaborative effort. This is a status update to let everyone know our recent progress in the space and to start sharing some initial results. Furthermore, oftentimes benchmarking in Linux yields strange compilation errors that send users troubleshooting. At the same time, benchmarking CPU performance in Linux is a bit tricky because oftentimes the guides and tutorials are written for one Linux distribution and quickly become dated. There are absolutely tons of Linux benchmarks available. In the mobile space, however, Core i7 processors make sense for PC gamers, because they have 2 times more physical cores, which can clearly make their mark in games.One area that has been in intense focus over the past week or so in the STH lab has been adding a Linux CPU benchmarking capability. In addition, the clock frequency is slightly lower (usually in the range 100-200MHz in direct comparison).Since many PC games still have problems to use all CPU cores - this is especially true for hyperthreading - the Desktop Core i5 processors area quite enough for current games. ![]() Only Desktop versions with an attached K are overclockable, they have a unlocked multiplier.The cache is compared to the Core i7 1-2MB smaller but that has usually only a very little effect in performance. All Core i5 desktop processors offer 4 cores and no hyperthreading while in the mobile sector all Core i5 processors have 2 cores and hyperthreading.Mobile versions of Core i5 CPUs can be recognized on the attached M, U or Y. The Intel Core i5 processors are together with the Core i7/i9 processors the most powerful processors for private use from Intel.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |