Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!batcomputer!kahn
From: kahn@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Shahin Kahn)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: ATTACK OF KILLER MICROS
Message-ID: <9079@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>
Date: 18 Oct 89 06:59:40 GMT
References: <35825@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <127@csinc.UUCP>
Reply-To: kahn@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu
Organization: Theory Center, Cornell U., Ithaca NY
Lines: 15

In article <127@csinc.UUCP> rpeglar@csinc.UUCP (Rob Peglar x615) writes:
>(pick your number, the most popular one recently seems to be Linpack
>100x100 all Fortran, Dongarra's Table One).  The national labs have proven

Throw away ALL your copies of the LINPACK 100x100 benchmark if you
are interested in supercomputers.  The 300x300 is barely big enough
and uses a barely good-enough algorithm to qualify for supercomputer
comparison as a low-impact guideline only.
JJD has lots of warning words in the first paragraphs of his list
but looks like most people go right to the table and never read the
paper.

If you must use a single-program benchmark, use the lesson taught 
by the Sandia people (JohnGustafson, et.al.):  Keep the time fixed
and vary the problem size.