Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 11:59:06 -0700 From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com> To: <unknown@riverstyx.net> Cc: <freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: Mindcruft ... Message-ID: <000401be9729$59dad700$021d85d1@whenever.youwant.to> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9905051049470.14073-100000@hades.riverstyx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Maybe a better way would be to set an amount of money, then let each team > choose the hardware in the budget, based on list prices from the > manufacturers. Each team gets a $15000 server and then they go head to > head on performance. That presumes that you are trying to measure price/performance ratio. And you would have to include the cost of the operating system in there or your comparison makes no sense. The problem with so many of these benchmarks is there's no explanation for why the methodology was chosen as it was, so it's not clear what the benchmark is attempting to measure. The recent Mindcraft benchmark of NT versus Linux is a shining example of this. Why Win98 as the client? Why four network cards? Why a RAID system? Why 1Gb of RAM? Absent any other explanation, the only conclusion we can draw is that they did things this way because Microsoft wanted them to. DS To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000401be9729$59dad700$021d85d1>