Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site sauron.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!gould9!ncr-sd!ncrcae!sauron!campbell From: campbell@sauron.UUCP (Mark Campbell) Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards,net.lang.c Subject: Re: AIM Benchmarks Message-ID: <597@sauron.UUCP> Date: Mon, 9-Dec-85 09:43:56 EST Article-I.D.: sauron.597 Posted: Mon Dec 9 09:43:56 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 11-Dec-85 21:39:28 EST References: <567@scc.UUCP> <518@uel> Reply-To: campbell@sauron.UUCP (Mark Campbell) Organization: NCR Corp., Advanced System Development, Columbia, SC Lines: 55 Xref: linus net.unix-wizards:13210 net.lang.c:6804 > I am interested in finding out what people > think of the AIM benchmarks. How useful are they > to you? How would you improve them? [Preliminary Disclaimer: This article in no way reflects the judgement or policy of NCR Corporation. I alone am responsible for its contents.] There are two AIM benchmarks currently in use: AIM 1.5 and AIM 2.0. AIM Technology has a pretty restrictive licensing policy with both. Publishing the results of these benchmarks are subject to this licensing policy. AIM 1.5 consists of eight tests: - A C Compiler Test - A Disk Write Throughput Test: - An FP Test - A Multi-User Edit Test - A Multi-User Sort Test - A Million Operation Test - A Memory Throughput Test - An Interprocessor Communication Test Aim 2.0 consists of a large collection of generally smaller tests and uses a linear modeling technique along with a user-specified system mix ratio to approximate system performance. The disk throughput benchmark tests both disk read's and write's with a large fixed buffer size. There are no explicit multi-user tests. Both are decent benchmarks for measuring uniprocessor system performance; however, neither should be used to judge multiprocessing systems. The linear modeling scheme used to determine system performance in AIM 2.0 is highly suspect. Only the individual test results of either should be used. AIM 1.5's disk write throughput test is a pretty interesting concept...it can expose some true weaknesses in a given implementation of a file system (hint: Let the buffer size range up to 16K for fairness, and then test a BSD file system. The results are pretty interesting.). In order to improve these benchmarks, I'd probably try to merge both of them together. I would throw out the AIM 2.0 disk throughput tests in favor of those in AIM 1.5. I'd also make the multi-user benchmarks of AIM 1.5 a bit more realistic. Otherwise, I'd use the results of both. I've seen better benchmarks, but they all take 2 hours or more to execute. If you want a simple benchmark that executes pretty quickly, neither is a bad choice. P.S. "A benchmark proves which system executes the benchmark the fastest...that's it." --- Anonymous -- Mark Campbell Phone: (803)-791-6697 E-Mail: {decvax!mcnc, ihnp4!msdc}!ncsu!ncrcae!sauron!campbell