Aaron Spink (aaronspink.delete@this.notearthlink.net) on August 10, 2014 8:04 am wrote:
> Wilco (Wilco.Dijkstra.delete@this.ntlworld.com) on August 10, 2014 5:00 am wrote:
>
> > Also there is no point in comparing with Intel SPEC results due to the Intel compiler breaking
> > some of the SPEC benchmarks - the correct result is likely about 55. If you want to compare
> > CPU performance using SPEC, you have to use the same compiler and settings.
> >
>
> I'll take the voracity of a fully sumbitted SPEC score over some estimate any day of the week.
> You are making so many assumptions about that *estimated* score and then trying to rake Intel
> over the coals for fully accepted results. AKA it doesn't matter if you think the Intel compiler
> is breaking things, its an fully accepted result by SPEC, your argument holds no water.

Whether official or not, the Intel SPEC scores do not translate into real world performance - if you believe otherwise you're deluded. Using the Intel scores as a basis for anything besides marketing bragging rights is just insane.

To get a reasonable estimate of real world performance you can run SPEC using GCC, and this is what most companies actually do - after all GCC is the main compiler when using Linux servers.

Wilco