[Beowulf] Disappointing floating point performance for X5560 versus SPECmarks?
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Nifty Tom Mitchell niftyompi at niftyegg.comMon Oct 12 14:29:49 PDT 2009
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Disappointing floating point performance for X5560 versus SPECmarks?
- Next message: [Beowulf] Disappointing floating point performance for X5560 versus SPECmarks?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 01:08:47PM -0700, Gerasimatos, Dimitrios V (343K) wrote: > > > According to SPECfp2006, the X5560 should blow the doors off of the E5430. > The X5560 scores 36 while the E5430 scores about 18. > > > However, our own benchmarking using nbench, unixbench, and a home-grown > utility (twobod) all show that any differences are attributed to clock speed. Memory, compiler? -- T o m M i t c h e l l Found me a new hat, now what?
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Disappointing floating point performance for X5560 versus SPECmarks?
- Next message: [Beowulf] Disappointing floating point performance for X5560 versus SPECmarks?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list