* [BENCHMARK] 2.5.41 contest results
@ 2002-10-08 20:59 Con Kolivas
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Con Kolivas @ 2002-10-08 20:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux kernel mailing list
The original posting of this disappeared into the ether so here is another copy
for lkml.
Here follow the contest (http://contest.kolivas.net) benchmark results up to and
including 2.5.41
noload:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [3] 67.7 98 0 0 1.01
2.5.38 [3] 72.0 93 0 0 1.07
2.5.39 [2] 72.2 93 0 0 1.07
2.5.40 [1] 72.5 93 0 0 1.08
2.5.40-mm2 [1] 72.2 93 0 0 1.07
2.5.41 [1] 73.8 93 0 0 1.10
process_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [3] 106.5 59 112 43 1.59
2.5.38 [3] 89.5 74 34 28 1.33
2.5.39 [2] 91.2 73 36 28 1.36
2.5.40 [2] 82.8 80 25 23 1.23
2.5.40-mm2 [1] 98.0 69 45 33 1.46
2.5.41 [1] 91.1 73 38 30 1.36
Proportional change here. Time longer than .40 but load also achieving more in
that time; not a real performance penalty.
io_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [3] 492.6 14 38 10 7.33
2.5.38 [1] 4000.0 1 500 1 59.55
2.5.39 [2] 423.9 18 30 11 6.31
2.5.40 [1] 315.7 25 22 10 4.70
2.5.40-mm2 [2] 208.0 38 12 10 3.10
2.5.41 [2] 607.5 13 47 12 9.04
Something happened here. Under heavy writing load it started choking again.
Noticeably detrimental.
mem_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [3] 100.0 72 33 3 1.49
2.5.38 [3] 107.3 70 34 3 1.60
2.5.39 [2] 103.1 72 31 3 1.53
2.5.40 [2] 102.5 72 31 3 1.53
2.5.40-mm2 [2] 165.1 44 38 2 2.46
2.5.41 [1] 101.6 73 30 3 1.51
read_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [2] 134.1 54 14 5 2.00
2.5.38 [2] 100.5 76 9 5 1.50
2.5.39 [2] 101.3 74 14 6 1.51
2.5.40 [1] 101.5 73 13 5 1.51
2.5.40-mm2 [1] 102.7 75 7 4 1.53
2.5.41 [1] 101.1 75 7 4 1.51
Basically very similar results except for write loads being allowed to do more
to the detriment of other tasks.
Below are also the experimental loads not included in the stable release of contest:
tarx_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [1] 132.4 55 2 9 1.97
2.5.38 [1] 120.5 63 2 8 1.79
2.5.39 [1] 108.3 69 1 6 1.61
2.5.40 [1] 110.7 68 1 6 1.65
2.5.40-mm2 [1] 188.1 39 3 7 2.80
2.5.41 [2] 138.8 53 2 8 2.07
Tar extract load seems to be doing proportionately more work than .40
tarc_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [2] 106.5 70 1 8 1.59
2.5.38 [1] 97.2 79 1 6 1.45
2.5.39 [1] 91.8 83 1 6 1.37
2.5.40 [1] 96.9 80 1 6 1.44
2.5.40-mm2 [1] 91.9 82 1 6 1.37
2.5.41 [1] 93.3 81 1 6 1.39
lslr_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [1] 89.8 77 1 20 1.34
2.5.38 [1] 99.1 71 1 20 1.48
2.5.39 [1] 101.3 70 2 24 1.51
2.5.40 [1] 97.0 72 1 21 1.44
2.5.40-mm2 [1] 94.3 75 1 21 1.40
2.5.41 [1] 93.6 75 1 18 1.39
Con
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2002-10-08 20:53 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-10-08 20:59 [BENCHMARK] 2.5.41 contest results Con Kolivas
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.