From owner-freebsd-chat Wed May 5 12:35:15 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [209.249.129.138]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92A9814D18 for ; Wed, 5 May 1999 12:35:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from hasty@rah.star-gate.com) Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost.star-gate.com [127.0.0.1]) by rah.star-gate.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA10484; Wed, 5 May 1999 12:35:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from hasty@rah.star-gate.com) Message-Id: <199905051935.MAA10484@rah.star-gate.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: unknown@riverstyx.net Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Mindcruft ... In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 05 May 1999 11:34:43 PDT." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 12:35:03 -0700 From: Amancio Hasty Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Yeap, I always consider first the hardware irrespective of whether the OS supports it well or not 8) > Well, I figure that's the only thing one of these types of benchmarks > *could* measure. You're taking identical hardware and seeing what each OS > can do, without considering what's best for that OS. > > --- > tani hosokawa > river styx internet > > > On Wed, 5 May 1999, David Schwartz wrote: > > > > > > Maybe a better way would be to set an amount of money, then let each team > > > choose the hardware in the budget, based on list prices from the > > > manufacturers. Each team gets a $15000 server and then they go head to > > > head on performance. > > > > That presumes that you are trying to measure price/performance ratio. And > > you would have to include the cost of the operating system in there or your > > comparison makes no sense. > > > > The problem with so many of these benchmarks is there's no explanation for > > why the methodology was chosen as it was, so it's not clear what the > > benchmark is attempting to measure. > > > > The recent Mindcraft benchmark of NT versus Linux is a shining example of > > this. Why Win98 as the client? Why four network cards? Why a RAID system? > > Why 1Gb of RAM? Absent any other explanation, the only conclusion we can > > draw is that they did things this way because Microsoft wanted them to. > > > > DS > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message -- Amancio Hasty hasty@star-gate.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message