4 ms·

I read this a few times and just wanted to confirm - are you saying the benchmark itself is can’t handle the higher core count?

• zamadatix 2y ago
  That's one way to view it. Another is the benchmark doesn't intend to measure the "peak multi-core CPU performance" the article assumes multi-core score is meant to measure. It's really measuring something more like mixed workload performance.
  • olliej 2y ago
    Oh interesting. As a performance metric that does seem like it would be more valuable for lots of use cases, so measuring that seems good. Maybe they need to add an additional “cpu bound multiprocessing perf”, and make it easier for professional tech reporters to understand complex concepts like benchmark numbers :D (in fairness to the reporters it does sound like the benchmark name legitimately implies that it’s a max parallel throughput benchmark, but if this is your job you should really know what your benchmarks are actually measuring). Honestly a benchmark I would like to - which is more of a software/kernel/os/scheduling one - is “how responsive is this machine under heavy load”. A non zero part of wanting that as part of a benchmark is that popular benchmarks often seem to be the only way to get companies to fix “uncommon” issues.