By: Klimax (danklima.delete@this.gmail.com), March 8, 2015 7:44 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
David Kanter (dkanter.delete@this.realworldtech.com) on March 8, 2015 2:30 am wrote:
> Wilco (Wilco.Dijkstra.delete@this.ntlworld.com) on March 7, 2015 9:50 am wrote:
> > David Kanter (dkanter.delete@this.realworldtech.com) on March 7, 2015 12:43 am wrote:
> > > Wilco (Wilco.Dijkstra.delete@this.ntlworld.com) on March 6, 2015 2:31 pm wrote:
> > > > Brett (ggtgp.delete@this.yahoo.com) on March 6, 2015 12:57 pm wrote:
> > > > > David Kanter (dkanter.delete@this.realworldtech.com) on March 6, 2015 12:42 am wrote:
> > > > > > > A57 is definitely more than 20% faster at the same clock, as you can easily conclude
> > > > > > > from various benchmarks (eg. Geekbench shows 40% single threaded gain overall
> > > > > > > in AArch32 mode between Galaxy S5 and Galaxy S6 at the same clock).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's a bogus comparison since Geekbench contains lots of AES
> > > > > > stuff, and ARM64 contains special instructions for AES.
> > > > >
> > > > > Are you accusing ARM of pulling an Intel, making sure that benchmarks are dominated
> > > > > by feature X right before Intel adds feature X to the instruction set. ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > This tactic is old hat, blatantly obvious for over a decade. Happy
> > > > > to see that ARM is playing by the rules of the CPU market.
> > > >
> > > > Yeah ARM is to blame, after all Intel only added AES early 2010...
> > >
> > > I'm not blaming anyone. I'm saying it's ridiculous to make
> > > inferences about general performance using benchmarks
> > > that are skewed by the presence of AES instructions (that goes for any designs, not just ARM).
> >
> > Given we all understand exactly how much skew there is, it means you can actually make
> > very good inferences. It is also possible to remove the AES result if necessary. It
> > doesn't change the fact that A57 shows far more than 20% IPC gain on Geekbench.
>
> Looking at Geekbench again, I'm reminded that it's total crap.
>
> Half their integer benchmarks are image manipulation and crypto stuff.
>
> I have no idea what sobel or dijkstra do, they might be useful.
For Dijkstra algorithm: Finding shortest path in the graph:
Dijkstra's algorithm
> Wilco (Wilco.Dijkstra.delete@this.ntlworld.com) on March 7, 2015 9:50 am wrote:
> > David Kanter (dkanter.delete@this.realworldtech.com) on March 7, 2015 12:43 am wrote:
> > > Wilco (Wilco.Dijkstra.delete@this.ntlworld.com) on March 6, 2015 2:31 pm wrote:
> > > > Brett (ggtgp.delete@this.yahoo.com) on March 6, 2015 12:57 pm wrote:
> > > > > David Kanter (dkanter.delete@this.realworldtech.com) on March 6, 2015 12:42 am wrote:
> > > > > > > A57 is definitely more than 20% faster at the same clock, as you can easily conclude
> > > > > > > from various benchmarks (eg. Geekbench shows 40% single threaded gain overall
> > > > > > > in AArch32 mode between Galaxy S5 and Galaxy S6 at the same clock).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's a bogus comparison since Geekbench contains lots of AES
> > > > > > stuff, and ARM64 contains special instructions for AES.
> > > > >
> > > > > Are you accusing ARM of pulling an Intel, making sure that benchmarks are dominated
> > > > > by feature X right before Intel adds feature X to the instruction set. ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > This tactic is old hat, blatantly obvious for over a decade. Happy
> > > > > to see that ARM is playing by the rules of the CPU market.
> > > >
> > > > Yeah ARM is to blame, after all Intel only added AES early 2010...
> > >
> > > I'm not blaming anyone. I'm saying it's ridiculous to make
> > > inferences about general performance using benchmarks
> > > that are skewed by the presence of AES instructions (that goes for any designs, not just ARM).
> >
> > Given we all understand exactly how much skew there is, it means you can actually make
> > very good inferences. It is also possible to remove the AES result if necessary. It
> > doesn't change the fact that A57 shows far more than 20% IPC gain on Geekbench.
>
> Looking at Geekbench again, I'm reminded that it's total crap.
>
> Half their integer benchmarks are image manipulation and crypto stuff.
>
> I have no idea what sobel or dijkstra do, they might be useful.
For Dijkstra algorithm: Finding shortest path in the graph:
Dijkstra's algorithm