From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 12 16:29:19 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E9AD16A41F for ; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:29:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from cracauer@schlepper.zs64.net) Received: from schlepper.zs64.net (schlepper.zs64.net [212.12.50.230]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD4B543D5C for ; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:29:18 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from cracauer@schlepper.zs64.net) Received: from schlepper.zs64.net (schlepper [212.12.50.230]) by schlepper.zs64.net (8.13.3/8.12.9) with ESMTP id k0CGTGfS016464; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 17:29:16 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from cracauer@schlepper.zs64.net) Received: (from cracauer@localhost) by schlepper.zs64.net (8.13.3/8.12.9/Submit) id k0CGTFIp016463; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:29:15 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from cracauer) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:29:15 -0500 From: Martin Cracauer To: Danial Thom Message-ID: <20060112112915.A16360@cons.org> References: <20060111191224.A93090@cons.org> <20060112141925.91320.qmail@web33307.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20060112141925.91320.qmail@web33307.mail.mud.yahoo.com>; from danial_thom@yahoo.com on Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 06:19:25AM -0800 Cc: "Marc G. Fournier" , Martin Cracauer , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Dual Core vs HyperThreading vs Dual CPU X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 16:29:19 -0000 > > I have benchmarks comparing dual-core 939 > > socket systems against dual > > 940 socket systems here: > > > http://cracauer-forum.cons.org/forum/crabench.html > > Just a question about your benches, any reason > you just don't ship files to /dev/null? That was > always the standard in unix to get the disk out > of it. I am not sure what specific test you are referring to, but in general I avoid using /dev/null as a sink like the plague. Speed on /dev/null varies drastically between OSes, and sometimes between kernel versions (e.g. SMP and non-SMP kernel). In combination with other load it becomes unpredictable. Any benchmark doing dd of=/dev/null is bogus IMHO. My cstream utility has a build-in disgard option which avoids this problem. Martin -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Martin Cracauer http://www.cons.org/cracauer/ FreeBSD - where you want to go, today. http://www.freebsd.org/