Search Results

Search found 271 results on 11 pages for 'benchmarks'.

Page 1/11 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  | Next Page >

  • Intel Xeon E5 (Sandy Bridge-EP) and SQL Server 2012 Benchmarks

    - by jchang
    Intel officially announced the Xeon E5 2600 series processor based on Sandy Bridge-EP variant with upto 8 cores and 20MB LLC per socket. Only one TPC benchmark accompanied product launch, summary below. Processors Cores per Frequency Memory SQL Vendor TPC-E 2 x Xeon E5-2690 8 2.9GHz 512GB (16x32GB) 2012 IBM 1,863.23 2 x Xeon E7-2870 10 2.4GHz 512GB (32x16GB) 2008R2 IBM 1,560.70 2 x Xeon X5690 6 3.46GHz 192GB (12x16GB) 2008R2 HP 1,284.14 Note: the HP report lists SQL Server 2008 R2 Enterprise Edition...(read more)

    Read the article

  • x86 Router Benchmarks?

    - by Kevin
    I have grow to prefer x86 based router OS's like Vyatta and pfSense over their competitors Cisco and Juniper (Well, I never really used Juniper, but still.). However, they feel "fake" to me, like "Frankenstein" routers. I think my greatest worry is that I am missing out on something by not using the main contenders. Are there any benchmarks out there that compare the main metrics (throuput, etc.) of x86 router operating systems to their proprietary counterparts?

    Read the article

  • Any Javascript optimization benchmarks?

    - by int3
    I watched Nicholas Zakas' talk, Speed up your Javascript, with some interest. I liked how he benchmarked the various performance improvements created by various optimization techniques, e.g. reducing calls to deeply nested objects, changing loops to count down instead of up, etc. I would like to run these benchmarks myself though, to see exactly how our current browsers are faring. I guess it wouldn't be too difficult to cook up some timed loops, but I'd like to know if there are any existing implementations out there.

    Read the article

  • Benchmarks for Single and MultiThreaded programs

    - by user280848
    Hi I am trying to compare the performance of Single and Multithreaded Java programs. Are there any single thread benchmarks which are available which I could then use and convert to their multithreaded version and compare the performance. Could anybody guide me as to what kind of programs(not very small) are suitable for this empirical comparison. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • A few words about Micro-Benchmarks

    Its been a long time since I included my this discussion is only approximately correct disclaimer so Ill just preface it here.  In the interest of space and clarity, this discussion is only approximately correct.  OK, now we can move on I love micro-benchmarks. Really.  I rely on micro-benchmarks to help me understand what is going on in my system on a day to day or even build to build basis.  Understanding which micro-benchmarks are really vital is essential to keeping your...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • Excellent Windows Azure benchmarks

    - by Sarang
    The Extreme computing group has released a fairly comprehensive set of benchmarks  for almost all aspects of WA. They have also provided the source code to alleviate all doubts that may surface with the MSFT logo lurking around the top right of their homepage :) (Which also resides at a cloudapp.net url). The code is simple and the tests comprehensive enough to hold as data points for customer interactions. Add to it the clean no nonsense Silverlight charts to render the benchmarks and you are set to sell. Technorati Tags: Azure,Benchmark,Extreme Computing Group

    Read the article

  • Does anyone do hardware benchmarks on compiling code?

    - by Colen
    I've seen a bunch of sites that benchmark new hardware on gaming performance, zipping some files, encoding a movie, or whatever. Are there any that test the impact of new hardware (like SSDs, new CPUs, RAM speeds, or whatever) on compile and link speeds, either linux or windows? It'd be really good to find out what mattered the most for compile speed and be able to focus on that, instead of just extrapolating from other benchmarks.

    Read the article

  • New Whitepaper: Advanced Compression 11gR1 Benchmarks with EBS 12

    - by Steven Chan
    In my opinion, if there's any reason to upgrade an E-Business Suite environment to the 11gR1 or 11gR2 database, it's the Advanced Compression database option.  Oracle Advanced Compression was introduced in Oracle Database 11g, and allows you to compress structured data (numbers, characters) as well as unstructured data (documents, spreadsheets, XML and other files).  It provides enhanced compression for database backups and also includes network compression for faster synchronization with standby databases.In other words, the promise of Advanced Compression is that it can make your E-Business Suite database smaller and faster.  But how well does it actually deliver on that promise?Apps 12 + Advanced Compression Benchmarks now availableThree of my colleagues, Uday Moogala, Lester Gutierrez, and Andy Tremayne, have been benchmarking Oracle E-Business Suite Release 12 with Advanced Compression 11gR1.  They've just released a detailed whitepaper with their benchmarking results and recommendations.This whitepaper is available in two locations:Oracle E-Business Suite Release 12.1 with Oracle Database 11g Advanced Compression (Note 1110648.1) (requires My Oracle Support access)Oracle E-Business Suite Release 12.1 with Oracle Database 11g Advanced Compression (Applications Benchmark website, PDF, 500K)

    Read the article

  • Is running "milli"-benchmarks a good idea?

    - by Konstantin Weitz
    I just came across the Caliper project and it looks very nice. Reading the introduction to microbenchmarks, one gets the feeling that the developers would not suggest to use the framework if the benchmark takes longer than a second or so. I looked at the code and it looks like a RuntimeOutOfRangeException is actually thrown if a scenario takes longer than 10s to execute. Could you explain to me what the problems are with running larger benchmarks? My motivation for using Caliper was to compare two join-algorithm implementations. Those will definitely run for quite some time and will do some disk IO, yet running the entire database would make it hard to do the comparison, because the configuration of the algorithms and the visualization of the results would be a pain.

    Read the article

  • Benchmarks Using Oracle Solaris 11

    - by Brian
    The following is a list of links to recent benchmarks which used Oracle Solaris 11. Oracle TimesTen In-Memory Database Performance on SPARC T4-2 World Record Performance on PeopleSoft Enterprise Financials Benchmark on SPARC T4-2 SPARC T4 Servers Running Oracle Solaris 11 and Oracle RAC Deliver World Record on PeopleSoft HRMS 9.1 SPEC CPU2006 Results on Oracle's Sun x86 Servers SPARC T4-4 Beats 8-CPU IBM POWER7 on TPC-H @3000GB Benchmark SPARC T4-2 Delivers World Record SPECjvm2008 Result with Oracle Solaris 11 SPARC T4-2 Server Beats Intel (Westmere AES-NI) on ZFS Encryption Tests SPARC T4 Processor Beats Intel (Westmere AES-NI) on AES Encryption Tests SPARC T4 Processor Outperforms IBM POWER7 and Intel (Westmere AES-NI) on OpenSSL AES Encryption Test SPARC T4-1 Server Outperforms Intel (Westmere AES-NI) on IPsec Encryption Tests SPARC T4-2 Server Beats Intel (Westmere AES-NI) on SSL Network Tests SPARC T4-2 Server Beats Intel (Westmere AES-NI) on Oracle Database Tablespace Encryption Queries

    Read the article

  • TPC-H Benchmarks on SQL Server 2014 with Columnstore

    - by jchang
    Three TPC-H benchmark results were published in April of this year at SQL Server 2014 launch, where the new updateable columnstore feature was used. SQL Server 2012 had non-updateable columnstore that required the base table to exist in rowstore form. This was not used in the one published TPC-H benchmark result on SQL Server 2012, which includes two refresh stored procedures, one inserting rows, the second deleting rows. It is possible that the TPC-H rules do not allow a view to union two tables?...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Harping on Metadata Performance: New Benchmarks

    <b>Linux Magazine:</b> "Metadata performance is perhaps the most neglected facet of storage performance. In previous articles we&#8217;ve looked into how best to improve metadata performance without too much luck. Could that be a function of the benchmark? Hmmm..."

    Read the article

  • 1 Million IOPS

    - by GrumpyOldDBA
    As a keen follower of storage performance I couldn't help but be drawn to this article in The Register http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/14/lsi_million_iops/ this morning. I gave my 5 year old laptop a new lease of life with a SSD and in combination with the old drive made external managed to reduce the time of a demo query from 50 odd mins down to 6 mins. I also have 4 Silicon Power 32GB SSDs set up as a raid 0 on my home server, an overblown PC. http://www.futurestorage.co.uk/index.asp?selmanuf...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Intel Xeon 5600 (Westmere-EP) and 7500 (Nehalem-EX)

    - by jchang
    Intel Xeon 5600 (Westmere-EP) and 7500 (Nehalem-EX) Performance Intel launched the Xeon 5600 series (Westmere-EP, 32nm) six-core processors on 16 March 2010 without any TPC benchmark results. In the performance world, no results almost always mean bad or not good results. Yet there is every reason to believe that the Xeon 5600 series with six-cores (X models only) will performance exactly as expected for a 50% increase in the number of cores at the same frequency (as the 5500) with no system level...(read more)

    Read the article

  • IBM System x3850 X5 TPC-H Benchmark

    - by jchang
    IBM just published a TPC-H SF 1000 result for their x3850 X5 , 4-way Xeon 7560 system featuring a special MAX5 memory expansion board to support 1.5TB memory. In Dec 2010, IBM also published a TPC-H SF1000 for their Power 780 system, 8-way, quad-core, (4 logical processors per physical core). In Feb 2011, Ingres published a TPC-H SF 100 on a 2-way Xeon 5680 for their VectorWise column-store engine (plus enhancements for memory architecture, SIMD and compression). The figure table below shows TPC-H...(read more)

    Read the article

  • How to perform a detailed and quick 3D performance test

    - by gsedej
    I am wondering how to quickly test performance of my 3D graphics. Since glxgears is not benchmark what should I use. Also glxgears sometimes stuck at 60FPS, you cannot even compare before/after driver update (e.g. adding xorg-edgers PPA). Even glxgears doesn't really work out of box. One possibility is screensavers, but you can't see FPS. I am also not willing to install 600MB nexuiz, specially if I am running on Live-CD. Other 3D games are also very big... Unigine tests are too demanding for opensource drivers (problems with too low OpenGL and probably texture compression (S3TC...)). I would also like to test OpenGL 2.x extentions. How to quickly test your 3D performance?

    Read the article

  • Developer oriented hardware benchmarks?

    - by Promit
    Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong places, but every hardware benchmark I've found, for nearly any component, is oriented towards gamers and/or workstations (video editing etc). Is there anyone doing benchmarks that are relevant to software developers? For example, take SSDs. I don't care how fast Crysis loads off an SSD -- that is completely worthless information. What I want to know is, which drive yields the quickest build times? What about Intellisense and refactoring operations? What RAID configuration has the biggest benefit? I could probably come up with more examples, but you get the point. Long story short, where are the benchmarks that tell me which hardware will be most effective in helping me be a productive software developer?

    Read the article

  • Apache2 benchmarks - very poor performance

    - by andrzejp
    I have two servers on which I test the configuration of apache2. The first server: 4GB of RAM, AMD Athlon (tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 5600 + Apache 2.2.3, mod_php, mpm prefork: Settings: Timeout 100 KeepAlive On MaxKeepAliveRequests 150 KeepAliveTimeout 4 <IfModule Mpm_prefork_module> StartServers 7 MinSpareServers 15 MaxSpareServers 30 MaxClients 250 MaxRequestsPerChild 2000 </ IfModule> Compiled in modules: core.c mod_log_config.c mod_logio.c prefork.c http_core.c mod_so.c Second server: 8GB of RAM, Intel (R) Core (TM) i7 CPU [email protected] Apache 2.2.9, **fcgid, mpm worker, suexec** PHP scripts are running via fcgi-wrapper Settings: Timeout 100 KeepAlive On MaxKeepAliveRequests 100 KeepAliveTimeout 4 <IfModule Mpm_worker_module> StartServers 10 MaxClients 200 MinSpareThreads 25 MaxSpareThreads 75 ThreadsPerChild 25 MaxRequestsPerChild 1000 </ IfModule> Compiled in modules: core.c mod_log_config.c mod_logio.c worker.c http_core.c mod_so.c The following test results, which are very strange! New server (dynamic content - php via fcgid+suexec): Server Software: Apache/2.2.9 Server Hostname: XXXXXXXX Server Port: 80 Document Path: XXXXXXX Document Length: 179512 bytes Concurrency Level: 10 Time taken for tests: 0.26276 seconds Complete requests: 1000 Failed requests: 0 Total transferred: 179935000 bytes HTML transferred: 179512000 bytes Requests per second: 38.06 Transfer rate: 6847.88 kb/s received Connnection Times (ms) min avg max Connect: 2 4 54 Processing: 161 257 449 Total: 163 261 503 Old server (dynamic content - mod_php): Server Software: Apache/2.2.3 Server Hostname: XXXXXX Server Port: 80 Document Path: XXXXXX Document Length: 187537 bytes Concurrency Level: 10 Time taken for tests: 173.073 seconds Complete requests: 1000 Failed requests: 22 (Connect: 0, Length: 22, Exceptions: 0) Total transferred: 188003372 bytes HTML transferred: 187546372 bytes Requests per second: 5777.91 Transfer rate: 1086267.40 kb/s received Connnection Times (ms) min avg max Connect: 3 3 28 Processing: 298 1724 26615 Total: 301 1727 26643 Old server: Static content (jpg file) Server Software: Apache/2.2.3 Server Hostname: xxxxxxxxx Server Port: 80 Document Path: /images/top2.gif Document Length: 40486 bytes Concurrency Level: 100 Time taken for tests: 3.558 seconds Complete requests: 1000 Failed requests: 0 Write errors: 0 Total transferred: 40864400 bytes HTML transferred: 40557482 bytes Requests per second: 281.09 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request: 355.753 [ms] (mean) Time per request: 3.558 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate: 11217.51 [Kbytes/sec] received Connection Times (ms) min mean[+/-sd] median max Connect: 3 11 4.5 12 23 Processing: 40 329 61.4 339 1009 Waiting: 6 282 55.2 293 737 Total: 43 340 63.0 351 1020 New server - static content (jpg file) Server Software: Apache/2.2.9 Server Hostname: XXXXX Server Port: 80 Document Path: /images/top2.gif Document Length: 40486 bytes Concurrency Level: 100 Time taken for tests: 3.571531 seconds Complete requests: 1000 Failed requests: 0 Write errors: 0 Total transferred: 41282792 bytes HTML transferred: 41030080 bytes Requests per second: 279.99 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request: 357.153 [ms] (mean) Time per request: 3.572 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate: 11287.88 [Kbytes/sec] received Connection Times (ms) min mean[+/-sd] median max Connect: 2 63 24.8 66 119 Processing: 124 278 31.8 282 391 Waiting: 3 70 28.5 66 164 Total: 126 341 35.9 350 443 I noticed that in the apache error.log is a lot of entries: [notice] mod_fcgid: call /www/XXXXX/public_html/forum/index.php with wrapper /www/php-fcgi-scripts/XXXXXX/php-fcgi-starter What I have omitted, or do not understand? Such a difference in requests per second? Is it possible? What could be the cause?

    Read the article

  • Flushing disk cache for performance benchmarks?

    - by Ido Hadanny
    I'm doing some performance benchmark on some heavy SQL script running on postgres 8.4 on a ubuntu box (natty). I'm experiencing some pretty un-stable performance, even though I'm supposed to be the only one running on the machine (the same script on the exact same data might run in 20m and then 40m for no specific reason). So, remembering my distant DBA training, I decided I should flush the postgres cache, using sudo /etc/init.d/postgresql restart, but it's still shaky! My question: maybe I'm missing some caches in my disk/os? I'm using a netapp appliance as my storage. Am I on the right track? Do I even want to make sure I get repeatable performance before I start tuning?

    Read the article

  • Benchmarks relevant for a Visual Studio .Net development workstation

    - by user30715
    I am developing a system with Windows 7-64, Visual Studio and Sharepoint on a virtual workstation on some kind of VMWare server. The system is painfully slow, with VS lagging behind when entering code, Intellisense lagging, opening and saving files takes ages when compared to a normal budget laptop. As far as I can see the virtual machine has OK specs and does not seem to be swapping etc., and the IT dept also says that they can't see anything wrong when they're monitoring the system. As long as the problem is not well-documented, the IT dept and management does not want to throw money (=upgraded laptops) at us, so I need to show some sort of benchmark. It has been many years since I did any system benchmarking, and I don't know the current benchmark software, so my question is which benchmark will be most relevant for Visual Studio performance? Not just for compiling fast, but also to reflect the "responsiveness" of the system. Cheers, user30715

    Read the article

  • How are benchmarks for multiple cores calculated?

    - by B Seven
    I found this site to compare CPU's. http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html What wasn't clear is how the benchmark for multiple core processors is calculated. If one CPU has 4 cores (such as Intel Core i7 which comes in 2, 4, and 6 core versions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_i7#Core_i7), does that mean that the benchmark should be double that of the version that has 2 cores (assuming the same clock frequency)?

    Read the article

  • Speed improvements for Perl's chameneos-redux in the Computer Language Benchmarks Game

    - by Robert P
    Ever looked at the Computer Language Benchmarks Game (formerly known as the Great Language Shootout)? Perl has some pretty healthy competition there at the moment. It also occurs to me that there's probably some places that Perl's scores could be improved. The biggest one is in the chameneos-redux script right now—the Perl version runs the worst out of any language: 1,626 times slower than the C baseline solution! There are some restrictions on how the programs can be made and optimized, and there is Perl's interpreted runtime penalty, but 1,626 times? There's got to be something that can get the runtime of this program way down. Taking a look at the source code and the challenge, how can the speed be improved?

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  | Next Page >