mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > PrimeNet

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-06-22, 06:41   #1
ixfd64
Bemusing Prompter
 
ixfd64's Avatar
 
"Danny"
Dec 2002
California

2×3×397 Posts
Default a suggestion for the benchmarks page

The benchmarks page is getting mighty big. Would it be possible to implement an option that displays only the average of the benchmarks? It would be really useful for users who merely want an idea of how well a certain CPU would do.
ixfd64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-23, 20:03   #2
garo
 
garo's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Termonfeckin, IE

22×691 Posts
Default

I second that request. Or better still have separate pages for different types of computers. And average up the benchmarks that are from the same processor but clocked to within 1-2% of each other.
garo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-23, 21:33   #3
Flatlander
I quite division it
 
Flatlander's Avatar
 
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England

31·67 Posts
Default

Thirdeded.
I much prefer the way they used to be.
Flatlander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-27, 02:11   #4
wreck
 
wreck's Avatar
 
"Bo Chen"
Oct 2005
Wuhan,China

23·3·7 Posts
Default

At least I think there should no same two line as follows.
Code:
Intel Xeon E5462 @ 2.80GHz 2793 17.91 20.32 26.00 31.74 37.81 42.06 55.64 67.83 80.57 92.40  
Intel Xeon E5462 @ 2.80GHz 2793 17.91 20.32 26.00 31.74 37.81 42.06 55.64 67.83 80.57 92.40  
Intel Xeon E5462 @ 2.80GHz 2793 17.91 20.32 26.00 31.74 37.81 42.06 55.64 67.83 80.57 92.40  
Intel Xeon E5462 @ 2.80GHz 2793 17.91 20.32 26.00 31.74 37.81 42.06 55.64 67.83 80.57 92.40  
Intel Xeon E5462 @ 2.80GHz 2793 17.91 20.32 26.00 31.74 37.81 42.06 55.64 67.83 80.57 92.40
wreck is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-28, 03:02   #5
cheesehead
 
cheesehead's Avatar
 
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA

1E0C16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wreck View Post
At least I think there should no same two line as follows.
Code:
Intel Xeon E5462 @ 2.80GHz 2793 17.91 20.32 26.00 31.74 37.81 42.06 55.64 67.83 80.57 92.40  
Intel Xeon E5462 @ 2.80GHz 2793 17.91 20.32 26.00 31.74 37.81 42.06 55.64 67.83 80.57 92.40  
Intel Xeon E5462 @ 2.80GHz 2793 17.91 20.32 26.00 31.74 37.81 42.06 55.64 67.83 80.57 92.40  
Intel Xeon E5462 @ 2.80GHz 2793 17.91 20.32 26.00 31.74 37.81 42.06 55.64 67.83 80.57 92.40  
Intel Xeon E5462 @ 2.80GHz 2793 17.91 20.32 26.00 31.74 37.81 42.06 55.64 67.83 80.57 92.40
The absolute uniformity of times suggests that these are duplicate reports of a single run on a single system.

Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2009-06-28 at 03:06
cheesehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-28, 05:18   #6
Primeinator
 
Primeinator's Avatar
 
"Kyle"
Feb 2005
Somewhere near M52..

3·5·61 Posts
Default

Tally one more up. I agree. There is an excess of information right now that may be interesting to some (so it could be archived and not the main benchmarks).
Primeinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-28, 12:39   #7
cheesehead
 
cheesehead's Avatar
 
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA

1E0C16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by garo View Post
average up the benchmarks that are from the same processor but clocked to within 1-2% of each other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheesehead View Post
The absolute uniformity of times suggests that these are duplicate reports of a single run on a single system.
I had failed to note garo's suggestion. Undue weighting of exact duplicates would be of little consequence for narrow ranges of clockings, but if exact duplicates were reduced to single entries their influence would be fully nullified.

The data base should retain all nonduplicate individual reports, but new reports should not be added if they are exact duplicates of reports already in the data base.

Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2009-06-28 at 12:45
cheesehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-06-29, 03:28   #8
lfm
 
lfm's Avatar
 
Jul 2006
Calgary

52×17 Posts
Default computer summary

I'd like to see a report linked from the "Computer Properties" page for a single computer name to a list of the current assignments and recent results for that computer.
lfm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-10, 19:45   #9
petrw1
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
 
petrw1's Avatar
 
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada

2×3×773 Posts
Default Hey ... I like it

The new benchmark page, that is. All kinds of choice now:
- Show just mine
- OC or not
- at least 'n' reports
- 32 or 64 bit
- Mhz range
- Time period
petrw1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-10, 20:41   #10
Prime95
P90 years forever!
 
Prime95's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL

1D4416 Posts
Default

and options for you to flag anomalous benchies so they won't appear in reports unless requested.
Prime95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-12, 00:31   #11
lfm
 
lfm's Avatar
 
Jul 2006
Calgary

1A916 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime95 View Post
and options for you to flag anomalous benchies so they won't appear in reports unless requested.
It seems the "Delete?" check boxes don't really do anything yet.
lfm is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question re: Benchmarks Page Rodrigo Hardware 44 2011-07-01 21:55
Just a suggestion... bearnol Miscellaneous Math 0 2006-04-23 07:50
suggestion: "check exponent status" page ixfd64 Lounge 3 2004-05-27 00:51
suggestion junky NFSNET Discussion 3 2004-02-10 07:19
Suggestion..... dave_0273 Marin's Mersenne-aries 4 2003-12-29 20:44

All times are UTC. The time now is 23:57.

Sun May 16 23:57:03 UTC 2021 up 38 days, 18:37, 0 users, load averages: 1.36, 1.66, 1.82

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.