Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Benchmarking ARM Tablets, Smart-Phones

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,369

    Default Benchmarking ARM Tablets, Smart-Phones

    Phoronix: Benchmarking ARM Tablets, Smart-Phones

    When writing this morning about what's going on with Iveland and OpenBenchmarking.org, one of the recent items being worked on in this area completely escaped my mind: the mobile benchmarking improvements. Time and money (new hardware) has been spent in providing greater automated testing and performance benchmarking of the Phoronix Test Suite on ARM-based mobile devices...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=ODc5NA

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    2

    Default benchmarking on n900

    I look forward to giving this a go when you're done. Will you be placing into the devel repository? Also what is the minimum architecture being targetted, as I have other, Marvell Kirkwood - ARMv5 - hardware to test it on.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459

    Default

    there are two main classes of Arm here , the old ones without SIMD and the new ones Arm v7 Cortex class with included 128bit NEON SIMD.

    here's an example of such Arm v7 Cortex class CPU's,
    this real life Benchmark test came from the old x264-dev logs if anyone's interested in the real life Number's , and StippenG's number's came from an older Quad A9/NEON developer board at Uni apparently, and the generic single core A8/NEON Beagle board OC.

    640x360 at Ultrafast: 38.59 seems like a very good start without these extra SIMD patches being written yet

    "2010-08-24 15:39:19 < StippenG> Some X264 Benchmarks (Rush Hour 640x360, preset=medium, crf=24): 4-core Cortex-A9 @ 400 MHz gives 5.55 fps, Beagleboard (A8 @ 720MHz) gives 1,65. Really nice speedup, considering the much higher frequency of the A8
    2010-08-24 15:39:56 < Dark_Shikari> It'd go a lot faster if you used a faster preset.
    2010-08-24 15:40:01 < Dark_Shikari> Or if you wrote some of the asm we're missing
    2010-08-24 15:40:26 < Dark_Shikari> But yeah, that scales surprisingly well. about 3.5x faster
    2010-08-24 15:40:27 < StippenG> Yes. Superfast gives 22.07. Ultrafast: 38.59
    2010-08-24 15:41:23 < StippenG> Guess the out-of-order execution and shorter pipeline is really quite a bit better for performance
    2010-08-24 15:41:35 < Dark_Shikari> Well, the A9 is known to be a lot faster
    "

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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