Xref: utzoo comp.arch:19968 comp.sys.sgi:7509
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!pacbell.com!att!att!dptg!ulysses!andante!alice!andrew
From: andrew@alice.att.com (Andrew Hume)
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.sys.sgi
Subject: further progress on benchmarks
Message-ID: <11747@alice.att.com>
Date: 26 Dec 90 04:09:56 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ
Lines: 12


	following suggestions by tve and kenner, i reran my benchmarks
as a sequential stream on one cpu (cpu 7) and all other cpus were executing
a busy loop (for(;;);).
	the results? the average spread decreased from .65% to .46%
but more importantly, only one benchmark had a big spread (.91%).
(previously, there had been 3: 1.26%, 1.01% and .83%.)

	i can live with this but frankly it is annoying that there is so much
imprecision.

	andrew@research.att.com