Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 15:45:42 -0600 From: Steve Passe <smp@csn.net> To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@mat.net> Cc: Andreas Klemm <andreas@klemm.gtn.com>, Walter Haslbeck <WH@ODS.de>, smp@FreeBSD.ORG, everybodyunix@wup.de, jk@ct.heise.de Subject: Re: Dual PPro Mainboard f. SCO SMP Message-ID: <199705012145.PAA08539@Ilsa.StevesCafe.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 01 May 1997 17:11:25 EDT." <Pine.BSF.3.91.970501170835.2470B-100000@Journey2.mat.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, >Andreas, I think you really ought to double check this. When I did my >own checks on my SMP setup, I found that just running make -j 8 (without >going smp) gave a serious speedup. There WAS additional speedup when I >turned on smp, but it's NOT 2 for 1. To do the benchmark correctly, you >have to run the same program in both places, and turning on the -j 8 >feature for smp only is fooling you. being a bi-noid I always have trouble with statistical type math, but I would set the difference shown by these figures as 1.79 using "-j4" for UP and "-j8" for SMP is fair, as these produce the best results for each case. the time for UP at -j4: 213.17 the time for SMP at -j8: 119.08 213.17 / 119.08 == 1.789696 not quite 2-1, but not shabby. Chuck, you might want to re-try your test compiles, we have gained some speed with recent changes. -- Steve Passe | powered by smp@csn.net | Symmetric MultiProcessor FreeBSD
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705012145.PAA08539>