SPECmarks....

[Gary Tse]

rcd at ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes:
|newbery at stout.atd.ucar.edu (Santiago Newbery) writes in response to a
|general "what's a SPECmark?" question:
|> ...Others complain however, that is more weighted in favor of
|> floating-pt. performance vs. integer performance, so Intel branched off
|> and created the I Spec or Integer Specmark.
|
|"Others" is approximately "intel" - to the extent that pundits say that "I
|SPECmark" really means "Intel SPECmark".

Shucks, the SPEC number is supposed to be reported with a breakdown on 
the results of all the component benchmarks of the suite anyway.  Given
the breakdown, if someone wants to generate an "integer SPEC", or a "fp
SPEC", or an "everything-but-spice SPEC", that's cool.  Gives the marketing
critters something to do, ya know.  Besides, the rest of us can calculate
geometric means too. 

Oh, or do you mean Intel is quoting their "I SPEC" number without giving a 
breakdown?  Well, heck, yet another null data point in their marketing
stuff is no big deal.

(Honestly, though, anything, even this "I SPECmark", is an improvement
over Dhrystone mips or Landmark MHz or whatever they use nowadays.  Just
MHO, of course.  I am not interested in a benchmark flame, no sir. :-) 

-- 
 Gary Tse,  garyt at ios.Convergent.COM  ||  tse at soda.Berkeley.EDU
 Live free or die.