Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!ames!amelia!wilbur.nas.nasa.gov!eugene
From: eugene@wilbur.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.super
Subject: Re: SPEC benchmarks for supercomputer
Message-ID: <7139@amelia.nas.nasa.gov>
Date: 4 Jul 90 05:19:43 GMT
References: <103645@convex.convex.com>
Sender: news@amelia.nas.nasa.gov
Reply-To: eugene@wilbur.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Distribution: comp
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Lines: 21

> David Tayler notes and promotes SPEC from gcc discussion.

I video taped the ISCA'90 workshop on benchmarking in May
(a little over 6 hours of workshop).  I specifically asked that
representatives from various efforts get a chance to speak, in
particular SPEC.  The nearly unanimious opinion (less the SPEC
rep I was involved in inviting) was that SPEC was less than adequate
for supercomputers.

I only note this as a set of opinions which differs from Dave.
The workshop was organized by John Roberts (NIST), David Bailey, and
myself and included Frank McMahon, Ann Hayes, Dan Reed, and a few other
benchmarking people.  I only wish the group as a whole had not come
down so hard on SPEC.  Also PERFECT was not brought out and "bashed"
more.

P.S. attendees reading this expecting tapes (yes it takes a while
to get copies made of clusters of 4 (2 HR) tapes.

--e. nobuo miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene