Replies to post #11185 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[yourbankruptcy]

wbmw, I wonder how practical are any Fortran benchmarks. This language is retired and for retireds, though there are huge computational libraries still around. What percentage of SPEC scores are C and what Fortran? Can one bad Fortran score kill the whole result?

As far as I know those languages, it is simpler to make well optimized C compiler than Fortran one. And it is simpler to write a program, which will be properly optimized, using C. The whole idea of Fortran benchmark is showing how small the market of those applications that are performing in line with SPEC is. I'm sure that any reasonable 3D-volume modeling menchmark on C will show better with 64 bits.

[jhalada]

wbmw,

PGI scores are dissappointing.

But there are a couple of things AMD can smile about:

SPECint2000 = 1317
SPECint_base2000 = 1248
http://www.spec.org/osg/cpu2000/results/res2003q3/cpu2000-20030728-02427.html
Beats everything except Itanium 2
= beats all Xeons

SPECint_rate2000 = 30.5
SPECint_rate_base2000 = 28.8
http://www.spec.org/osg/cpu2000/results/res2003q3/cpu2000-20030728-02425.html
Beats everything except Itanium 2, which it ties at 30.5
= beats all Xeons

SPECfp2000 = 1293
SPECfp_base2000 = 1209
http://www.spec.org/osg/cpu2000/results/res2003q3/cpu2000-20030728-02428.html
Beats all Xeons

SPECfp_rate2000 = 29.9
SPECfp_rate_base2000 = 28.1
http://www.spec.org/osg/cpu2000/results/res2003q3/cpu2000-20030728-02426.html
Beats all Xeons by HUGE margin

Since the server market is owned by Xeon, I think AMD has a good opportunity to gain a share of this profitable market segment.

Joe

[kpf]

wbmw spec scores

not what I expected...

Not sure the comparison you posted allows your conclusion:
The scores are from different plattforms. (Rioworks/Windows Server 2003/Intel/Compaq Compilers and IBM/SuSE SLES/PGI/gcc33 Compilers). Too many different things involved here to figure out what determines Scores to what extent. Interesting enough, 32-bit scores appear to be higher than 64-bit scores, something we have seen in other benchmarks already..

And then, assuming PGI Compilers indeed lower SPEC-scores, why did IBM use it for Spec reports? (Yes I remember it was me who posted about lukewarm commitment.... and on playing games around Opterons).

I admit I seem to miss a lot to understand what this all means in a broader context. Maybe individual CPU-SPEC-scores taken from a server system are pretty meaningless in the broader context of systems, maybe this all is just as misleading as some other benchmarks?

Would be glad if somebody could shed some light on this issue here. (Wonder how much innocence i still have to loose...)

K.