Search Results

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

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

• Oracle Expands Sun Blade Portfolio for Cloud and Highly Virtualized Environments

  - by Ferhat Hatay

  Oracle announced the expansion of Sun Blade Portfolio for cloud and highly virtualized environments that deliver powerful performance and simplified management as tightly integrated systems.  Along with the SPARC T3-1B blade server, Oracle VM blade cluster reference configuration and Oracle's optimized solution for Oracle WebLogic Suite, Oracle introduced the dual-node Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module with some impressive benchmark results.   Benchmarks on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module demonstrate the outstanding performance characteristics critical for running varied commercial applications used in cloud and highly virtualized environments.  These include best-in-class SPEC CPU2006 results with the Intel Xeon processor 5600 series, six Fluent world records and 1.8 times the price-performance of the IBM Power 755 running NAMD, a prominent bio-informatics workload.   Benchmarks for Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module  SPEC CPU2006  The Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module demonstrated best in class SPECint_rate2006 results for all published results using the Intel Xeon processor 5600 series, with a result of 679.  This result is 97% better than the HP BL460c G7 blade, 80% better than the IBM HS22V blade, and 79% better than the Dell M710 blade.  This result demonstrates the density advantage of the new Oracle's server module for space-constrained data centers.     Sun Blade X6275M2 (2 Nodes, Intel Xeon X5670 2.93GHz) - 679 SPECint_rate2006; HP ProLiant BL460c G7 (2.93 GHz, Intel Xeon X5670) - 347 SPECint_rate2006; IBM BladeCenter HS22V (Intel Xeon X5680)  - 377 SPECint_rate2006; Dell PowerEdge M710 (Intel Xeon X5680, 3.33 GHz) - 380 SPECint_rate2006.  SPEC, SPECint, SPECfp reg tm of Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation. Results from www.spec.org as of 11/24/2010 and this report.    For more specifics about these results, please go to see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf   Fluent The Sun Fire X6275 M2 server module produced world-record results on each of the six standard cases in the current "FLUENT 12" benchmark test suite at 8-, 12-, 24-, 32-, 64- and 96-core configurations. These results beat the most recent QLogic score with IBM DX 360 M series platforms and QLogic "Truescale" interconnects.  Results on sedan_4m test case on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module are 23% better than the HP C7000 system, and 20% better than the IBM DX 360 M2; Dell has not posted a result for this test case.  Results can be found at the FLUENT website.   ANSYS's FLUENT software solves fluid flow problems, and is based on a numerical technique called computational fluid dynamics (CFD), which is used in the automotive, aerospace, and consumer products industries. The FLUENT 12 benchmark test suite consists of seven models that are well suited for multi-node clustered environments and representative of modern engineering CFD clusters. Vendors benchmark their systems with the principal objective of providing comparative performance information for FLUENT software that, among other things, depends on compilers, optimization, interconnect, and the performance characteristics of the hardware.   FLUENT application performance is representative of other commercial applications that require memory and CPU resources to be available in a scalable cluster-ready format.  FLUENT benchmark has six conventional test cases (eddy_417k, turbo_500k, aircraft_2m, sedan_4m, truck_14m, truck_poly_14m) at various core counts.   All information on the FLUENT website (http://www.fluent.com) is Copyrighted1995-2010 by ANSYS Inc. Results as of November 24, 2010. For more specifics about these results, please go to see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf   NAMD Results on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module running NAMD (a parallel molecular dynamics code designed for high-performance simulation of large biomolecular systems) show up to a 1.8X better price/performance than IBM's Power 7-based system.  For space-constrained environments, the ultra-dense Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module provides a 1.7X better price/performance per rack unit than IBM's system.     IBM Power 755 4-way Cluster (16U). Total price for cluster: $324,212. See IBM United States Hardware Announcement 110-008, dated February 9, 2010, pp. 4, 21 and 39-46.  Sun Blade X6275 M2 8-Blade Cluster (10U). Total price for cluster:  $193,939. Price/performance and performance/RU comparisons based on f1ATPase molecule test results. Sun Blade X6275 M2 cluster: $3,568/step/sec, 5.435 step/sec/RU. IBM Power 755 cluster: $6,355/step/sec, 3.189 step/sec/U. See http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/power/hardware/reports/system_perf.html. See http://www.ks.uiuc.edu/Research/namd/performance.html for more information, results as of 11/24/10.   For more specifics about these results, please go to see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf   Reverse Time Migration The Reverse Time Migration is heavily used in geophysical imaging and modeling for Oil & Gas Exploration.  The Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module showed up to a 40% performance improvement over the previous generation server module with super-linear scalability to 16 nodes for the 9-Point Stencil used in this Reverse Time Migration computational kernel.  The balanced combination of Oracle's Sun Storage 7410 system with the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module cluster showed linear scalability for the total application throughput, including the I/O and MPI communication, to produce a final 3-D seismic depth imaged cube for interpretation. The final image write time from the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module nodes to Oracle's Sun Storage 7410 system achieved 10GbE line speed of 1.25 GBytes/second or better performance. Between subsequent runs, the effects of I/O buffer caching on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module nodes and write optimized caching on the Sun Storage 7410 system gave up to 1.8 GBytes/second effective write performance. The performance results and characterization of this Reverse Time Migration benchmark could serve as a useful measure for many other I/O intensive commercial applications. 3D VTI Reverse Time Migration Seismic Depth Imaging, see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf/entry/3d_vti_reverse_time_migration for more information, results as of 11/14/2010.                            

  Read the article

• Which CPU for SQL Server machine (Xeon, i5, i7, AMD Phenom)?

  - by Tony_Henrich

  I am going to build a full height server machine to be used for SQL Server 2008 64bit. I have $400 to spend for a CPU. Which CPU should I get among i5, i7, Xeon and Phenom in terms of performance. There are so many options and I am out of touch with the latest stuff. All I know I want something fast and works with DDR3 fast memory and works with some kind of fast system bus. I don't care about overclocking, 3D & gfx benchmarks. The machine is not used for games and gfx apps. Any recommendations?

  Read the article

• MySQL 5.5 on Windows server is horribly slow

  - by Brad

  I have had no luck getting MySQL 5.5 to be as fast as 5.1 or MariaDB on the exact same hardware/database/environment under Windows server 2003R2 or 2008R2. My benchmarks from our application: MySQL 5.5 + CentOS 5.2 (XenServer Virtual) = 28 seconds (box is "busy" not buried) MariaDB (5.1) + Windows 2003 (Physical box) = 130 seconds (box is 2% busy) MySQL 5.1 + Windows 2003 (Physical box) = 170 seconds (box is 2% busy) MySQL 5.5 + Windows 2003 (Physical box) = 305 seconds (As high as 600 seconds...) (box is 2% busy) The only difference between these runs is the removal of skip-locking and the running of mysql_upgrade.exe to update some tables for stored procs on 5.5. Yes, I know it's a release candidate, I'm feeding that back to MySQL as well. No slow queries are logged, it doesn't think it's being slow, it just is. I'm going to start tearing into the queries themselves to see if the INSERT/SELECT plans have gone buggo on 5.5. Any help would be appreciated! Thanks

  Read the article

• Intel Core i7-4960HQ vs. 4850HQ (Haswell) [on hold]

  - by Timothy R. Butler

  I'm looking at the new MacBook Pros and trying to decide between the Core i7-4960HQ (2.6 GHz) and i7-4850 (2.3 GHz). I've found some synthetic benchmarks comparing them, but I haven't found a lot of data, so I'd appreciate any pointers to good comparisons for the Haswell family (especially these two processors). My cursory analysis seems to suggest there isn't a huge gain from the extra 300 MHz. I'd like to determine not only whether this is generally true, but also to figure out if the gains that are made in performance come at too high of cost. Is the 2.6 going to be pushing the limits of what can fit in a thin laptop without overheating? I've looked at some of Intel's documentation, but have not been able to determine what the normal and maximum operating temperature differences are for the models. In the past, there have been times that Intel's fastest models in a given range ran especially hot and/or consumed significantly more power compared to slightly slower models. Do those concerns factor into the current generation?

  Read the article

• How to benchmark apache/nginx setup

  - by Saif Bechan

  I am planning to setup nginx as reverse proxy. I will have apache to deliver my dynamic content, and nginx will deliver the static content. My configuration i have now is just Apache with fastCGI. This gives me no configuration problems and runs great. After I have set up nginx I want to run some benchmarks to see if I really got some performance increases, else i will switch back. Does anyone know how I can benchmark this type of setup? Or maybe someone did this already and have some canned results, I will be glad to hear them.

  Read the article

• dell u2410 3dMark Benchmark distortion problems

  - by Scanningcrew

  Ive been doing burn in testing for a new system I have put together and I am running into some video distortion problems with running the 3DMark benchmark tools (Both 06 and Vantage). The graphics will be fine, then sometimes during a test switch the screen will light up with thin horizontal ranibow lines (Something that looks very "glitchy") If i turn the monitor off and back on it clears up. All the tests "pass" and my system gets good marks but it concerns me if I might have problems with games (The screen returns to normal if I dont resest monitor and just let tests pass). I want to return a problem component now before its too late if it is something with the new hardware. Also, I am monitoring temp with thermal laser gun and the card itself is not going above 65c. Any ideas? System: Asrock x58 Xtreme - Last BIOS (1.80) EVGA Geforce GTX 285 w/ latest nvidia drivers (Connect via DVI1) Dell U2410(Set to 59hz refresh 1900x1202 -although I believe benchmarks run 1200x1024) Windows 7 Ultimate 64 12Gb DDR3 1600 RAM

  Read the article

• Does anybody wish to help a poor researcher publish a paper?

  - by Mihai Todor

  I don't know if this is a good place to beg for help, but here it goes: basically, I need to run a secure recommender system simulation (C++ console application) in order to meet tonight's deadline, and the faculty's server grid decided to go offline. I could really use something like 10+ (actually, about 16 would be required to meet the deadline) virtual instances of some Linux that has GMP installed... Ideally, they should all have the same specs, because a part of the simulation will represent performance benchmarks. If my question is inappropriate in any way, I kindly ask the administrators to remove it.

  Read the article

• AMD Phenom II X4 965 crossfire motherboard

  - by Nick

  I am trying to build a cheap mining rig. I wanted to use the AMD Phenom II X4 965 (HDZ965FBGMBOX) processor as it got very good reviews and benchmarks, and is inexpensive. However, I am having trouble finding motherboards with crossfire support for 2 GPUs. AMD's website only lists five compatible motherboards, of which only one has crossfire support. Worse, it is expensive and seems to be obsolete and no longer available. I have trouble believing that there are only five compatible motherboards for that CPU. Are there any low-end motherboards that are both compatible with the AMD Phenom II X4 965 and have CrossFire support? (Is there a way to find this sort of information, like a central site that lists motherboards and their technical specifications?)

  Read the article

• Does dual-channel work only with an even number of RAM sticks?

  - by iconiK

  I have noticed that on the ASUS P5QL Pro motherboard the BIOS says "Dual Channel Asymmetric Mode" during POST. The motherboard has three 2GB Kingston ValueRAM 800 MHz DIMMs populated in the first 3 slots from the CPU socket. I have not run any benchmarks to verify that dual-channel is somehow being used, but I believed that dual-channel has to have an even number of sticks (and for triple channel, a multiple of 3). Another example is the Intel DX58SO motherboard; it has four DIMM slots, yet it's an LGA 1366 motherboard which does triple-channel. Apparently triple-channel still works with four DIMMs, instead of falling back to dual-channel. What does the BIOS' POST message mean in those case? Is dual-channel really used for the first two DIMMs, with the other one being an odd one in single-channel mode?

  Read the article

• CLI-Based monitoring tool for KVM

  - by Pinnacle

  I am developing a scheduler for running VMs on KVM. The scheduling has over-commitment of resources like memory and CPU. For this, I need a CLI-based monitoring tool that keeps me giving information about the resource usage of each VM, because it might be the case that due to over-provisioning of resources, VMs on a particular host are running very slowly depending on the benchmarks/programs each VM is running, and then I need to migrate a VM to another host and so on. I looked into libvirt-based tools like collects, MUNIN, Nagios-vert, etc.( http://libvirt.org/apps.html#monitoring ) I also looked into Ubuntu utility perf-kvm ( http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/maverick/man1/perf-kvm.1.html ) I want to ask which CLI-based would be recommended by the community so that I can make a automated scheduler that takes care of the above situation.

  Read the article

• My Graphics Card isn't working Properly

  - by Dan

  I have just upgraded from a Sapphire AMD 6670 2gb Graphics card to a Nvidia GTX 650 ti 2gb SSC and my Windows Experiance index has gone from 6.8 to 7.7 but when playing games i am seeing no improvements i cannot play saints row three on even the lowest settings but according to many people and benchmarks on the web i should be able to play it comfortably. I want to know why this is happening to me..... I have installed the latest drivers and i have direct 10 + 11 installed I am 15 and it's my birthday today as i got it as a present but its not doing what i want also in am using a dvi cable not hdmi because i need a new one and its in the post. Is it possible that using dvi will affect performance

  Read the article

• Increase the compression performance of VPN

  - by Martin

  I am currently switching from a system with HPN-SSH tunnels and enabled compression to something VPN based. I have tried tinc and n2n so far, hamachi requires a library I do not have. In my primitive benchmarks I am not satisfied with the achievable bandwidth compared to the SSH tunnels. In tinc the low LZO setting performed best, but compression is only available in UDP mode. Ideally I would like to have a TCP-based VPN with a multi-threaded compression. Can you suggest me some ideas how to increase the performance? Would it be possible to somehow put a compression filter in front of the tun interface? Or are there any VPN implementations that might be better suited for my needs (fast compression, TCP-based, switch mode, does not have to be super-secure)? I would consider tunnelling Ethernet over SSH, but according to some articles it is not advisable.

  Read the article

• What applications is NTFS preferable for? [closed]

  - by javano

  When building a new server I prefer to deploy Linux as my OS of choice. This gives me the luxury of being able to choose from various file systems (amongst other aspects), and I will choose a different FS for different servers, depending on what they will be used for. With Windows OS variants you can only use NTFS. Have any benchmarks or tests been performed that have shown NTFS to be a preferable choice for a given scenario or application (apart from just "running Windows" because it has to be on NTFS). To clarify what I mean; I might use filesystem X for large transactional storage volumes, but filesystem Y for front end web app servers. If I had a multi-platform application to deploy that (let's pretend) was available on Mac/Win/Lin, is there any type of application or scenario that would benefit from being on NTFS?

  Read the article

• Is there a MySQL performance benchmark to measure the impact of utf8_unicode_ci versus utf8_general_ci?

  - by MiniQuark

  I read here and there that using the utf8_unicode_ci collation ensures a better treatment of unicode text (for example, it knowns how to expand characters such as 'œ' into 'oe' for searching and ordering) compared to the default utf8_general_ci which basically just strips diacritics. Unfortunately, both sources indicate that utf8_unicode_ci is slightly slower than utf8_general_ci. So my question is: what does "slightly slower" mean? Has anyone run benchmarks? Are we talking about a -0.01% performance impact or rather something like -25%? Thanks for your help.

  Read the article

• How to benchmark kernel (-Os vs -O2)

  - by NightwishFan

  It seems logical to me that on a 64-bit kernel compiling it to optimize for size might help overall. (My distro of choice uses -O2) It has the benefits of more registers and memory and perhaps less cache contention than normal optimized code. I have a kernel compiled like this and it seems excellent. However my question is how can I prove this? I like using Phoronix for "real world" sort of benchmarks so I would prefer to test cases like that. What should I pick to test? Does anyone else have any alternatives? Thank you very much in advance.

  Read the article

• How do I tell if a Python pip install is working correctly or hanging?

  - by wobbily_col

  I am trying to install the python pandas package in a virtualenv using pip. On my development machine it installed correctly, but now I am trying on the server, it gets so far then it seems to get stuck: warnings.warn(LapackSrcNotFoundError.__doc__) /apps/PYTHON/2.7.3/lib/python2.7/distutils/dist.py:267: UserWarning: Unknown distribution option: 'define_macros' warnings.warn(msg) non-existing path in 'numpy/distutils': 'site.cfg' non-existing path in 'numpy/lib': 'benchmarks' Could not locate executable gfortran Could not locate executable f95 Found executable /apps/modules/wrappers/fortran/ifort Top shows ifort running at 46% cpu. Is there any way I can tell if this is working correctly (can I check files it is updating for example), or if it is stuck in a loop? It has been running for 40 minutes so far.

  Read the article

• AB failed requests - What can I do about them?

  - by matthewsteiner

  So, in the past I've never had any problems with this app. All benchmarks had 100% success rate. Yesterday I set up nginx to server static content and pass on other requests to apache. Now, if I have 1 concurrent user (-c 1) then everything is fine. But it seems the more concurrent users I have, the more failed requests I get. Not a lot, but maybe about 10 or 15 out of 350. They're "length", whatever that means. Visiting the website with a browser, I don't have any problems at all. How can I find out the cause of these failed requests?

  Read the article

• What are the pros & cons of these MySQL engines for OLTP -- XtraDB, PBXT, or TokuDB?

  - by Continuation

  I'm working on a social website with an approximate read/write split of 90/10. Trying to decide on a MySQL engine. The ones I'm interested in are: XtraDB PBXT TokuDB What are the pros and cons of them for my use case? A few specific questions: PBXT uses log-based structure that avoids double-writes. It sounds very elegant, but the benchmark I've seen doesn't show any/much advantages over XtraDB. Do you have any experience with PBXT/XtraDB you can share? TokuDB sounds VERY interesting. But all the benchmarks I've seen are about single-threaded bulk inserts - inserting 100M rows for example. that's not very relevant for OLTP. What about its performance with large number of concurrent threads writing and reading at the same time? Anyone has tried that?

  Read the article

• Great Blogs About Oracle Solaris 11

  - by Markus Weber

  Now that Oracle Solaris 11 has been released, why not blog about blogs. There is of course a tremendous amount of resource and information available, but valuable insights directly from people actually building the product is priceless. Here's a list of such great blogs. NOTE: If you think we missed some good ones, please let us know in the comments section !  Topic Title Author Top 11 Things My 11 favourite Solaris 11 features Darren Moffat Top 11 Things These are 11 of my favorite things! Mike Gerdts Top 11 Things 11 reason to love Solaris 11     Jim Laurent SysAdmin Resources Solaris 11 Resources for System Administrators Rick Ramsey Overview Oracle Solaris 11: The First Cloud OS Larry Wake Overview What's a "Cloud Operating System"? Harry Foxwell Overview What's New in Oracle Solaris 11 Jeff Victor Try it ! Virtually the fastest way to try Solaris 11 (and Solaris 10 zones) Dave Miner Upgrade Upgrading Solaris 11 Express b151a with support to Solaris 11 Alan Hargreaves IPS The IPS System Repository Tim Foster IPS Building a Solaris 11 repository without network connection Jim Laurent IPS IPS Self-assembly – Part 1: overlays Tim Foster IPS Self assembly – Part 2: multiple packages delivering configuration Tim Foster Security Immutable Zones on Encrypted ZFS Darren Moffat Security User home directory encryption with ZFS Darren Moffat Security Password (PAM) caching for Solaris su - "a la sudo" Darren Moffat Security Completely disabling root logins on Solaris 11 Darren Moffat Security OpenSSL Version in Solaris Darren Moffat Security Exciting Crypto Advances with the T4 processor and Oracle Solaris 11 Valerie Fenwick Performance Critical Threads Optimization Rafael Vanoni Performance SPARC T4-2 Delivers World Record SPECjvm2008 Result with Oracle Solaris 11 BestPerf Blog Performance Recent Benchmarks Using Oracle Solaris 11 BestPerf Blog Predictive Self Healing Introducing SMF Layers Sean Wilcox Predictive Self Healing Oracle Solaris 11 - New Fault Management Features Gavin Maltby Desktop What's new on the Solaris 11 Desktop? Calum Benson Desktop S11 X11: ye olde window system in today's new operating system Alan Coopersmith Desktop Accessible Oracle Solaris 11 - released! Peter Korn

  Read the article

• Google CDN or Akamai

  - by AlienWebguy

  We combine and minify our JS with Minify - the combined JS is then cached on Akamai. I'm suggesting to my supervisor that we put JQuery and JQueryUI on Google CDN and take it out of our combined JS. The benefits I see are parallel downloads, significantly smaller Akamai cache hit, and the high potential the user will have JQuery from Google CDN cached in his/her browser when he/she visits our site so no download will be required at all. I also pointed out how pointing to the major version CDN URL //ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1/jquery.min.js will eliminate the need for us to micro-manage our JQuery version control, and that if a new release introduces a bug, we simply point the CDN URL to a stable minor version of our choice until the issue is resolved. My supervisor disagrees and thinks keeping it on Akamai is the way to go. Any insight as to which is going to be faster here? I looked for some benchmarks and references online but they are either out-dated or merely talk about Google wanting to acquire Akamai. EDIT: Some further research has pointed me to an article mentioning how 'latest version' CDN URL's use short expires headers so it might be more optimal to use /jquery/1.7/. I'm fine with this - the general question still remains.

  Read the article

• Getting Optimal Performance from Oracle E-Business Suite

  - by Steven Chan (Oracle Development)

  Performance tuning and optimization in E-Business Suite environments can involve many different components and diagnostic tools.  Samer Barakat, Senior Architect in our Applications Performance group, held an OpenWorld 2013 session that covered: Performance triage, analysis and diagnostic tools Optimizing the E-Business Suite application tier, including Concurrent Manager Optimizing the E-Business Suite database tier Optimizing the E-Business Suite on Real Application Clusters (RAC) E-Business Suite on engineered systems, including Exadata and Exalogic Optimizing E-Business Suite data management, including archiving and purging  The Applications Performance group works with the world's largest E-Business Suite customers to isolate and resolve performance bottlenecks. This team has helped tune the E-Business Suite environments of world's largest companies to handle staggering amounts of transactional volume in multi-terabyte databases.  This group also publishes our official Oracle Apps benchmarks, white papers, and performance metrics. This is an essential set of tips and techniques that all EBS sysadmins and DBAs can use to improve the performance of their environments: Getting Optimal Performance from Oracle E-Business Suite (PDF, 1.7 MB) OpenWorld 2013 presentations are only available for approximately six months -- until ~March 2013.  Download this one while it's still available. Related Articles E-Business Suite Technology Sessions at OpenWorld 2013 OAUG/Collaborate Recap: Best Practices for E-Business Suite Performance Tuning

  Read the article

• Gemalto Mobile Payment Platform on Oracle T4

  - by user938730

  Gemalto is the world leader in digital security, at the heart of our rapidly evolving digital society. Billions of people worldwide increasingly want the freedom to communicate, travel, shop, bank, entertain and work – anytime, everywhere – in ways that are convenient, enjoyable and secure. Gemalto delivers on their expanding needs for personal mobile services, payment security, identity protection, authenticated online services, cloud computing access, eHealthcare and eGovernment services, modern transportation solutions, and M2M communication. Gemalto’s solutions for Mobile Financial Services are deployed at over 70 customers worldwide, transforming the way people shop, pay and manage personal finance. In developing markets, Gemalto Mobile Money solutions are helping to remove the barriers to financial access for the unbanked and under-served, by turning any mobile device into a payment and banking instrument. In recent benchmarks by our Oracle ISVe Labs, the Gemalto Mobile Payment Platform demonstrated outstanding performance and scalability using the new T4-based Oracle Sun machines running Solaris 11. Using a clustered environment on a mid-range 2x2.85GHz T4-2 Server (16 cores total, 128GB memory) for the application tier, and an additional dedicated Intel-based (2x3.2GHz Intel-Xeon X4200) Oracle database server, the platform processed more than 1,000 transactions per second, limited only by database capacity --higher performance was easily achievable with a stronger database server. Near linear scalability was observed by increasing the number of application software components in the cluster. These results show an increase of nearly 300% in processing power and capacity on the new T4-based servers relative to the previous generation of Oracle Sun CMT servers, and for a comparable price. In the fast-evolving Mobile Payment market, it is crucial that the underlying technology seamlessly supports Service Providers as the customer-base ramps up, use cases evolve and new services are launched. These benchmark results demonstrate that the Gemalto Mobile Payment Platform is designed to meet the needs of any deployment scale, whether targeting 5 or 100 million subscribers. Oracle Solaris 11 DTrace technology helped to pinpoint performance issues and tune the system accordingly to achieve optimal computation resources utilization.

  Read the article

• How to handle wildly varying rendering hardware / getting baseline

  - by edA-qa mort-ora-y

  I've recently started with mobile programming (cross-platform, also with desktop) and am encountering wildly differing hardware performance, in particular with OpenGL and the GPU. I know I'll basically have to adjust my rendering code but I'm uncertain of how to detect performance and what reasonable default settings are. I notice that certain shader functions are basically free in a desktop implemenation but can be unusable in a mobile device. The problem is I have no way of knowing what features will cause what performance issues on all the devices. So my first issue is that even if I allow configuring options I'm uncertain of which options I have to make configurable. I'm wondering also wheher one just writes one very configurable pipeline, or whether I should have 2 distinct options (high/low). I'm also unsure of where to set the default. If I set to the poorest performer the graphics will be so minimal that any user with a modern device would dismiss the game. If I set them even at some moderate point, the low end devices will basically become a slide-show. I was thinking perhaps that I just run some benchmarks when the user first installs and randomly guess what works, but I've not see a game do this before.

  Read the article

• How to deal with a CEO making all technical decision but with little technical knowledge ?

  - by anonymous

  Hi, Question posted anonymously for obvious reasons. I am working in a company with a dev group of 5-6 developers, and I am in a situation which I have a hard time dealing with. Every technical choice (language, framework, database, database scheme, configuration scheme, etc...) is decided by the CEO, often without much rationale. It is very hard to modify those choices, and his main argument consists in "I don't like this", even though we propose several alternative with detailed pros/cons. He will also decide to rewrite from scratch our core product without giving a reason why, and he never participates to dev meetings because he considers it makes things slower... I am already looking at alternative job opportunities, but I was wondering if there anything we (the developers) could do to improve the situation. Two examples which shocked me: he will ask us to implement something akin to configuration management, but he reject any existing framework because they are not written in the language he likes (even though the implementation language is irrelevant). He also expects us to be able to write those systems in a couple of days, "because it is very simple". he keeps rewriting from scratch on his own our core product because the current codebase is too bad (codebase whose design was his). We are at our third rewrite in one year, each rewrite worse than the previous one. Things I have tried so far is doing elaborate benchmarks on our product (he keeps complaining that our software is too slow, and justifies rewrites to make it faster), implement solutions with existing products as working proof instead of just making pros/cons charts, etc... But still 90 % of those efforts go to the trashbox (never with any kind of rationale behind he does not like it, again), and often get reprimanded because I don't do exactly as he wants (not realizing that what he wants is impossible).

  Read the article

• Japanese Multiplication simulation - is a program actually capable of improving calculation speed?

  - by jt0dd

  On SuperUser, I asked a (possibly silly) question about processors using mathematical shortcuts and would like to have a look at the possibility at the software application of that concept. I'd like to write a simulation of Japanese Multiplication to get benchmarks on large calculations utilizing the shortcut vs traditional CPU multiplication. I'm curious as to whether it makes sense to try this. My Question: I'd like to know whether or not a software math shortcut, as described above is actually a shortcut at all. This is a question of programming concept. By utilizing the simulation of Japanese Multiplication, is a program actually capable of improving calculation speed? Or am I doomed from the start? The answer to this question isn't required to determine whether or not the experiment will succeed, but rather whether or not it's logically possible for such a thing to occur in any program, using this concept as an example. My theory is that since addition is computed faster than multiplication, a simulation of Japanese multiplication may actually allow a program to multiply (large) numbers faster than the CPU arithmetic unit can. I think this would be a very interesting finding, if it proves to be true. If, in the multiplication of numbers of any immense size, the shortcut were to calculate the result via less instructions (or faster) than traditional ALU multiplication, I would consider the experiment a success.

  Read the article

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