Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 10:09:35 +0100 From: Joachim =?iso-8859-1?Q?Str=F6mbergson?= <watchman@ludd.luth.se> To: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Machines are getting too damn fast Message-ID: <3AA357CF.632AE0BB@ludd.luth.se> References: <200103040934.f249YHi27877@earth.backplane.com> <20010304230342.A3870@cokane.yi.org> <200103050512.f255CoB32923@earth.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Aloha! (Sorry for jumping right in to the thread here...) This might be a good time to mention the STREAM benchmark developed by John McCalpin. It measures sustained bandwidth of systems. The official web page is at: http://www.cs.virginia.edu/stream/ If you check the section under "PC-compatible Results" you should find machines comparable to what you are measuring. Also, there are a tool out there that will measure effective latency for cache levels and main store for a system - both first page and burst transfers. Need to search my ever inflating bookmarks... The news group comp.arch might be a source of info and would probably be interested in your results too. Matt Dillon wrote: > > :You should see what speed RamBus they were using, 600 or 800 Mhz. It is > :pretty fast for large memory writes and reads. It'd be cool to see how > :the different speeds stack up against one another. DDR comparisons would > :be cool too. Yeah, for the frequency, you have to take into account that > :these are different chips than your PIII or Athlons and the performance > :difference is not simply a linear relation to the frequency rating > :(i.e.: 1.3Ghz is not really over one-billion instructions per second, > :just clocks per second). We installed Linux at a UC Free OS User Group > :installfest here in cincinnati, it was pretty sweet. The machine was a > :Dell and the case was freakin' huge. It also came with a 21" monitor and > :stuff. The performace was really good, but not really any better than I > :hads gleaned from the newer 1Ghz Athlons or PIII's. > > It says 800 MHz (PC-800 RIMMs) on the side of the box. > > The technical reviews basically say that bulk transfer rates for > RamBus blow DDR away, but DDR wins for random reads and writes > due to RamBus's higher startup latency. I don't have any DDR > systems to test but I can devise a test program. > > Celeron 650 MHz (HP desktop) (DIMM) > 16.16 MBytes/sec (copy) > > Pentium III 550 MHz (Dell 2400) (DIMM) > 25.90 MBytes/sec (copy) > > Pentium 4 1.3 GHz / PC-800 RIMMs (Sony VAIO) > 32.38 MBytes/sec (copy) > > -Matt -- Cheers! Joachim - Alltid i harmonisk svängning --- FairLight ------ FairLight ------ FairLight ------ FairLight --- Joachim Strömbergson ASIC SoC designer, nice to CUTE animals Phone: +46(0)31 - 27 98 47 Web: http://www.ludd.luth.se/~watchman --------------- Spamfodder: regeringen@regeringen.se --------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3AA357CF.632AE0BB>