Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!caen!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.iastate.edu!john From: john@iastate.edu (Hascall John Paul) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Compilers & SPECmarks... Message-ID: <1991Apr9.052607.12055@news.iastate.edu> Date: 9 Apr 91 05:26:07 GMT References: <32097@shamash.cdc.com> Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System) Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA Lines: 35 mccalpin@perelandra.cms.udel.edu (John D. McCalpin) writes: }>> On 8 Apr 91 17:02:48 GMT, rrr@u02.svl.cdc.com (Rich Ragan) said: } gcc espr. li eqntott spice doduc nasa7 matrix fpppp tomcatv }Mips 6280 46.0 42.4 54.6 41.2 38.4 43.0 45.6 49.8 55.6 43.3 }CDC 4680 46.0 42.4 54.6 41.2 40.3 44.0 62.4 181.7 56.5 57.5 } ^^^^^ }I have worried about the inclusion of the 'matrix300' code in the SPEC }suite, as it is such a simple calculation mathematically that it is }possible that special compiler techniques can be used to greatly }enhance the performance without necessarily helping the performance of }more general codes. ... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This is the important factor, it would be nice to have a goodly number more than 10 tests... }HP9000/730 gets a score of 273 on this test, which raises its SPEC ... Is it time to axe "matrix300" from the SPECsuite? This makes the second instance (others?) of SPECnum which can only be explained by a compiler significantly reducing the problem. Also, I seem to recall there was another one on which the Snake SPEC was "out of character" (100+ while most of the rest were 30s or 40s)? I suppose that program suffers similarly? Comments? Corrections? Flames? (like I need to ask) John -- John Hascall An ill-chosen word is the fool's messenger. Project Vincent Iowa State University Computation Center john@iastate.edu Ames, IA 50011 (515) 294-9551