This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080100070608060707050003 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Alan, I have noticed that our dual Opteron 1.4 Ghz memory test is @ 1,008MB/sec vs the Uni 3Ghz P4 @ 2,852 MB/sec and Dual 2.4 Ghz Xeon systems @ 1,374 MB/sec. By running BBS in ramdisk, I feel this is showing us the limits of system memory, O/S and BLAST codes. Virtually no disk IO is observed during the benchmark and no swap is used. we use memtest+ ver. 1.2 to benchmark memory http://www.memtest.org/ I will be running BBS on both the P4 and Xeon soon and will post my results. One BBS setup change I made was '/bin/blastall' vs '/build/blastall'. All benchmarks ran error free. hope this helps Doug Alan Kilian wrote: > Doug, > > Do you know why your numbers are so different from Joe's > numbers posted here? <http://bioinformatics.org/bbs/> > > For some tests, you are significantly faster, for some you are > significantly slower. > > I'm just curious about how people explain differences in these > benchmark reports. > > I'm getting ready to try again to run these benchmarks on our > system, so any help you could provide would be great. > > Thanks, > > -Alan > >Doug: >1,1,1641 >2,1,1647 >2,2,1685 >3,4,3289 >3,1,3296 >3,3,3332 >3,2,3335 >4,1,863 >5,1,1683 >5,2,1690 >6,1,848 > >Joe: >1,1,2167 >2,1,1361 >2,2,2747 >3,1,1018 >3,2,2972 >3,4,3180 >3,3,4380 >4,1,391 >5,2,4011 >5,1,4015 >6,1,1988 > > > > --------------080100070608060707050003 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1"> <title></title> </head> <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff"> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1"> <title></title> Hello Alan,<br> I have noticed that our dual Opteron 1.4 Ghz memory test is <br> @ 1,008MB/sec vs the Uni 3Ghz P4 @ 2,852 MB/sec and <br> Dual 2.4 Ghz Xeon systems @ 1,374 MB/sec. <br> <br> By running BBS in ramdisk, I feel this is showing us the limits of system <br> memory, O/S and BLAST codes. Virtually no disk IO is observed<br> during the benchmark and no swap is used. <br> <br> we use memtest+ ver. 1.2 to benchmark memory<br> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.memtest.org/">http://www.memtest.org/</a><br> <br> I will be running BBS on both the P4 and Xeon soon and will post my results.<br> <br> One BBS setup change I made was '/bin/blastall' vs '/build/blastall'.<br> All benchmarks ran error free. <br> <br> hope this helps<br> Doug<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> Alan Kilian wrote:<br> <blockquote type="cite" cite="mid200406281657.LAA17953@raceme.attbi.com"> <pre wrap=""> Doug, Do you know why your numbers are so different from Joe's numbers posted here? <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://bioinformatics.org/bbs/"><http://bioinformatics.org/bbs/></a> For some tests, you are significantly faster, for some you are significantly slower. I'm just curious about how people explain differences in these benchmark reports. I'm getting ready to try again to run these benchmarks on our system, so any help you could provide would be great. Thanks, -Alan Doug: 1,1,1641 2,1,1647 2,2,1685 3,4,3289 3,1,3296 3,3,3332 3,2,3335 4,1,863 5,1,1683 5,2,1690 6,1,848 Joe: 1,1,2167 2,1,1361 2,2,2747 3,1,1018 3,2,2972 3,4,3180 3,3,4380 4,1,391 5,2,4011 5,1,4015 6,1,1988 </pre> </blockquote> </body> </html> --------------080100070608060707050003--