Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!aglew From: aglew@dwarfs.csg.uiuc.edu (Andy Glew) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: SPECmarks Message-ID: Date: 27 Feb 90 02:25:51 GMT References: <7393@pdn.paradyne.com <3300102@m.cs.uiuc.edu> Sender: news@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (News) Organization: University of Illinois, Computer Systems Group Lines: 13 In-Reply-To: gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu's message of 23-Feb-90 17:54 CST >Several people have made the point that SPEC is supposed to be a >"real-world" program benchmark, consisting of "today's" programs. >My understanding is that a benchmark is a standard, just as a 1-meter >bar of platinum stored in France is a standard. Computers are >measured by the SPEC standard. Standards should be timeless. You have your timeless standards for computer systems performance - things like "do 1E9 multiplies of random numbers". Trouble is, the timeless standards only measure a few dimensions of systems performance, and computer architects keep inventing new dimensions that make the timeless standards irrelevant. -- Andy Glew, aglew@uiuc.edu