4 ms·

Any comparison will have flaws but Phoronix has a track record for having bad non Linux benchmarks. People complain because they want a fair comparison. Benchm

Any comparison will have flaws but Phoronix has a track record for having bad non Linux benchmarks. People complain because they want a fair comparison. Benchmarks are vital. They can give you an estimate of how your application performs. They also often showcase how optimized a product is on different platforms.

diffeomorphism 7y ago
That answers none of my questions?
- trasz 7y ago
  If you get different results, the difference comes from the parts that hadn't changed. So if you were to run the exact same binaries in different environment (different operating system, or same operating system but built or configured differently) and you got different results, you'd be measuring differences between environments. But that's kind of obvious, so why are you asking this?
  - diffeomorphism 7y ago
    Because they proposed "fixing" the benchmarks by doing this, at which point I am asking what you hope to see in the benchmark if everything is the same. They consider difference due to compiler versions to be "wrong", differences in flags to be "wrong" etc. . So "the difference comes from the parts that hadn't changed", yeah which ones would you permit to change to consider the benchmark not "wrong"?
    - trasz 7y ago
      The difference due to compiler versions isn’t wrong. What’s wrong is attributing it to the operating system. Especially given how easy it would be to just keep the same compiler version. The problem with Phoronix v the build flags is not that they are different between systems/distros; quite the opposite: Phoronix builds the software in an unsupported way, ignoring system/distribution defaults. Which means, they measure software that’s miscompiled/misconfigured.