He is using to argue non-linear scaling, but he misinterprets the data..Originally Posted by adamsleath
First, there are two typos, or atleast I think they are typos, the first is at 2205 Mhz, he says 73.455 but I think he meant 93.455, this is in line with what would be expected. The other is 3301 or 3201, I looks like he ran the same run twice at the same frequency but recorded a different speed. Here is a plot of his SP1M time vs frequency
If you correct his typo (heck sometimes my 9's look like's 7), then it behaves more as expected. For example:
The typo's or inconsistent data points are not what really matters, what does matter is that he normalizes to the slowest time, and converts to a percentage... he makes the most common mistake when one analyzes time to complete rather than rate ... SP1M is measured in time it takes to complete the task, but processor speed is measured in frequency ... he cannot calculate scaling factors when the units of one dimension is the inverse of the other.... he should have taken 1/time and plotted against fequency to check linearity, when you do that, it becomes completely linear:
In short, he data shows nothing but a handful of mistakes and that indeed SP1M scales linearly with clock speed.
Jack
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks