Re: benchmark 1.10

[Francesco Potorti`]

   Each entry should include:
   
   o a more complete hardware specification.  For example, one of the
     entries is "Ultra 1".  Is that a 1/140, a 1/170, or a 1/200?  They
     have three different clock speeds.

Ehr..  I have no idea, really.  I just write the name of the box as
people send it to me.  Sometimes I asked for more detail, when I knew
there was non enough, but I had no idea about the different types of
Sun Ultra 1 stations out there.  As you say, that data is
meaningless.  I will ask.
   
     It's difficult, though, because should it be the model or the chip?
     For example, there's an entry for a "DEC Alpha 400".  It must be one
     of the models with a 400MHz A21164 chip, and that's probably more
     important than the actual model.

Since there are problems on two of the four the data for the beta
version of octave, which is now obsolete and moreover has a different
reference machine, I think I'll simply delete them :)
   
     Still, I'm thinking the precise model should be listed, maybe with
     additional columns for the chip and clock speed.  Something like the
     SPECmark table at ftp://ftp.cdf.toronto.edu/pub/spectable does.

The SPEC table is well detailed, but I don't plan to ask people to
send me all that data.  For example, it is not always obvious to know
what the bus clock is, or how much cache is used, so I'd like to stick
with just the model name, and the clock speed, as I've done until now.

Unless obviously someone else is willing to take this burden, in which
case, I'll hand it over to them :-).
   
   o a precise specification of the operating system, including the
     version (e.g. SunOS 4.1.3, Solaris 2.5.1, etc.).

In general, it should be useless, as the benchmark is done so that
octave runs 99,99....% in user mode.  I usually list the OS name, but
not the version.
   
   o a precise specification of the compiler used to compile Octave,
     including version *and compile flags*.  Also, whether an F77
     compiler was used for the Fortran, and if so, version and compile
     flags for it.

I ask people to send me data obtained with the *precompiled* versions
of octave.  If that's not the case, it is listed.  Ask John Eaton for
the details about the precompiled versions :-)
   
   So again, I applaud the effort, but it's difficult to do any real
   comparison without the entire picture.

Even with the above clarifications?

-- 
Francesco Potorti` (researcher)        Voice:    +39-50-593203
Computer Network Division              Operator: +39-50-593211
CNUCE-CNR, Via Santa Maria 36          Fax:      +39-50-904052
56126 Pisa - Italy                     Email:    address@hidden