Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 59

Thread: Quick, overall system performance suite?

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mendieta View Post
    We have a test candidate !

    http://global.phoronix-test-suite.co...-4549-6954-342

    If anyone could run their systems against this, it would be great. Just do as below, and please post a link to the results here

    Code:
    phoronix-test-suite benchmark mendieta-4549-6954-342
    In particular, I'd like to set a benchmark so we can compute also machine scores according to the algorithm in the first post (we can do it manually for now). Maybe an atom based netbook (I think you need at least 9 inch display for the 3D test to run). Can someone please run in such a system?
    Don't know if you care to see more tests on that, but I did one as well, I did it on specs similar to yours, 2.4 Ghz Phenom X3, 9600 GT, 4 gigs of ram and Ubuntu 9.04 x86_64, and I did another with the processor overclocked to 3.0 Ghz.

    http://global.phoronix-test-suite.co...13-17058-31074

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    20

    Default

    I'm probably coming in too late into this discussion, but it seems to me that one test with 'real-world' utility would be to measure the load (CPU and RAM) imposed on a system playing Flash videos on the YouTube, Hulu, etc. websites (using Adobe's Flash plugin inside a browser, that is).

    I'm particularly interested in whether Atom-based netbooks are up to the task... even my 2 GHz dual-core has trouble with this task sometimes.

    Does such a test exist in the PTS (or could one be added from elsewhere)?

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    3

    Default Disk Performance

    It might be a good idea to have a test of disk performance that is relatively independent of the CPU or other hardware - a sort of cross device standard. For this to work, it would be necessary define a ratio such as (disk performance)/(CPU of System benchmark), which has a value of 100 for a specfic hardware setup.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    65

    Default

    Whatever happened to this? I really like this idea, and hopefully no one is offended, but it sounds like making a version of PC Mark or Passmark for linux. A nice, quick, overall system benchmark for memory, disk, cpu, graphics, and you get an overall score. Though geekbench kind of does all this doesn't it? And it's included in pts.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    552

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skeetre View Post
    Whatever happened to this? I really like this idea, and hopefully no one is offended, but it sounds like making a version of PC Mark or Passmark for linux. A nice, quick, overall system benchmark for memory, disk, cpu, graphics, and you get an overall score. Though geekbench kind of does all this doesn't it? And it's included in pts.
    Mmm. No, geekbench actually does CPU + RAM, no disk or GPU.

    I think this is more feasible now, with openbenchmarking providing a geometric means in the analysis section.

    (Although there is a bug with the geometric mean, see http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...664#post335664 )

    I'll try to revive this thread soon

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    552

    Default

    So, here goes a dry run:

    http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...MEND-QUICKBE80

    Here is the idea:

    • 2 (CPU + RAM) tests (one with emphasis in single threaded + floating point, one in multi-threaded + floating point)
    • 2 GPU tests (one 2D, one 3D)
    • 2 disk tests (one READ, one WRITE)

    Some comments:

    - The CPU seems to be decently covered, and the tests download and run fast.
    - I am not happy with the Graphics tests: the 2D failed to install in the second machine I tried, and the 3D is very simple AND takes forever. Any suggestions? We need fast and reliable install, and fast runtime.
    - These disk tests seem to focus on throughput, but we really care about random IO for a general speed measure (this is what the OS does more often, by far). My problem so far was finding a test that does that _and_ runs in a couple minutes. Any ideas?

    Please test against these if you can and report, as well. Cheers!

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    552

    Default

    Here is one comparison of three systems: an older Vostro V13 with a single core celeron a 1.6 Ghz, a Chromebook with a newer dual core celeron @1Ghz, and an older Phenom 3 core @ 2.5 Ghz.

    http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...hgv=Vostro+V13

    The numbers make a lot of sense as of the feel for speed of the machines. The V13 makes up in disk speed (SSD) against the Chromebook (with a regular HD) with more CPU and GPU power. The Phenom is outdated but overall faster, paired with a modest (but faster than a Celeron IGP) Radeon HD 4650, and an SSD.

    The scores for the three are 1, 1.13 and 1.71, respectively.

    I like the idea, but we need better ideas for some of the tests, as discussed above.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    552

    Default

    Mmm ... I am thinking that including graphics might not be great, in that a server may only be CLI. Here is a test with three legs: sinlge thread, multithreaded, disk. The overall scores at the end seem pretty intuitive to me from using all these systems:

    http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1..._hgv=Atom+N270

    It might be better to have twp suites: QUICKBENCH-CLI and a QUICKBENCH-GUI.
    Last edited by mendieta; 06-12-2013 at 11:15 PM.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    sf
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Im looking for a good graphics test that will install on linux. I like the quicktest v4 but not the v5 that test does not always install on every machine

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    552

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by channon View Post
    Im looking for a good graphics test that will install on linux. I like the quicktest v4 but not the v5 that test does not always install on every machine
    Yep. I think it's an issue with the dependencies, you need this package
    https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/raring/...libxrender-dev

    And the test installed for qgears2 doesn't seem to be aware of that. It is hard to find a simple test that will at least assess very crudely how 'fast' the IGP is, that also runs fast, and that doesn't involve a huge download. Sigh!

    Anyways, many thanks for chiming in!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •