HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rskinner@mipos2.intel.com (Rod Skinner)
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
Subject: Re: specint, specfloat, mips...
Date: 28 Jan 93 19:56:44 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Santa Clara, CA USA

In article <lmdjtrINNsc7@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> walter@zarquon.Eng.Sun.COM writes:
>In article 23823@cenaath.cena.dgac.fr, brasseur@stna.dgac.fr (Christophe Le Brasseur CAP SESA TERTIAIRE AG25) writes:
>>Here are a few questions :
>>==========================
>>
>>What exactly are specint and specfloat ?
>>How can you compare spec to mips ?
>
>I am emailing you the SPEC FAQ for this group, which may help you.
>
>>We already made simulation of the system on sparc 10/30 and on Bull DPX2/360 >Bi-processor (a french computer with two 25Mhz 68040).
>
>This is the best answer.  Nothing represents your own code better than
>your own code.  You can use SPECint92 and SPECfp92 to get an idea of
>CPU speed to decide which machines to test with your code.
>
>>We looked at Sparc 10/52 and at RS6000.  ...
>>We can also get a DPX2/380 with 4 processors (33 Mhz 68040) : 100 Mips (!?) 
>
>Your description of the workload sounds multi-user and multi-threaded,
>so you can use SPECrate_int92 and SPECrate_fp92 to rate overall system
>compute capacity.  (See FAQ for the difference between the speed and
>capacity measures.)
>
>>So the point is : does my appplication use a lot of specints or a lot of specfloat ?
>
For system applications that depend on Oracle as you have
indicated...don't waste time on SPECfp92 or SPECrate_fp92.  The Oracle
application code is 99+% integer code.

The set of results that you should also consider is the set of results
published by the TPC and/or the SPEC SDM benchmark results.  These may
more closely track performance of your application.  I suspect that they
will track more closely than any of the individual CPU benchmarks.

>After running your code, the next best answer is to look at the
>descriptions of the individual SPEC benchmarks and match them with your
>application.  Then look at the SPECrates of those benchmarks most like
>your application.  Finally you can make your own measurements or seek
>advice on how much integer code is executed versus floating point code,
>but also consider the source of the advice.  (I won't offer any here :-)
>
>---
>Speaking for myself, not for Sun nor for SPEC...
>Walter Bays                                         walter.bays@eng.sun.com
>Sun Microsystems,  2550 Garcia Ave.,  MTV15-404,  Mountain View,  CA  94043
>(415) 336-3689     SPEC Steering Committee Chairman      FAX (415) 968-4873


Rod Skinner				I speak for myself only.
Intel Corp
2200 Mission College Blvd RN4-21          PH (408) 765-4474
Santa Clara, CA 95052                     FAX (408) 765-4920
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: bwilliam@iat.holonet.net (Bill Williams)
Subject: Re: i860 Paragon XP/S Fastest Computer of all??!!
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access BBS: 510-704-1058/modem
Distribution: inet
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 07:33:01 GMT

facts are facts. The i860 is the fastest processor out there. They list
full assembly source for all their most acclaimed benchamrks with this chip
(FFT, shading, zbuffer assist, etc.) Joe Programmer can type in the assembly
and run it timing it with wallclock seconds. The intel i860 is GODAMN FAST
and if had faster interrupt latency, and a superb optimizing C compiler,
would put all doubters in their place. At a given cycle, the integer unit,
the floating point adder pipeline, and the floatingpoint multiply
pipeline, can each complete one instruction. At 40 Mhz, you begin to see
that a claim of 40 Mips is MORE THAN FUCKING HONEST, and that a claim of 
80Mflops IS ALSO NO LIE!!!!!!

Can't you guys accept reality?

--Bill Williams (lover of all i860 graphics boards everywhere)

Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: paolog@tommy.Berkeley.EDU (Paolo Giusto)
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
Subject: Benchmarks for microcontrollers (MC68332,etc)
Date: 27 Jan 1993 19:37:39 GMT
Organization: EECS - Berkeley
Distribution: world
Reply-To: paolog@tommy.Berkeley.EDU (Paolo Giusto)
NNTP-Posting-Host: tommy.berkeley.edu

Does anyone know if there are benchmarks for microcontroller applications?
It necessarily has to exercise things like real-time operations and external interrupts.

Thanx
Paolo
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Paolo Giusto
  Dept. of EECS, 550A Cory Hall			Phone   +1-510-642-1459
  University of California			Fax     +1-510-643-5052
  Berkeley, CA 94720, USA			Email   paolog@ic.berkeley.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: YOUNG@tattoo.cs.widener.edu (Rob Young)
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
Subject: Re: TPC RESULTS NEEDED
Date: 21 Jan 1993 17:08:13 GMT
Organization: Widener News/Mail Gateway
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: tattoo.cs.widener.edu
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20


In <69100005@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com> rtaheri@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com writes:

> / hpcupt1:comp.benchmarks / YOUNG@tattoo.cs.widener.edu (Rob Young) /  7:26 am  Jan 13, 1993 /

> > 	They are available to the public for $20.  You can contact TPC at
> > 	408-295-6311.
> > 
> > 				Rob
> 
> That number is (408)295-8894.
> 
> Reza Taheri
> rtaheri@saffron.cup.hp.com

Yes, I apologize.  That number (6311) came from the bottom of page 8 in
Open Systems Today jan 4 issue.  They messed me up.

				Rob


                                                     young@tattoo.cs.widener.edu
"Mathematical formulizers wish to treat matters of intuition mathematically, 
 and make themselves ridiculous . . .  The mind . . . does it tacitly,
 naturally, and without technical rules."       -- Pascal 
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: dennisk@aplcenmp.apl.jhu.edu (Dennis M. Kavanagh)
Subject: benchmarks for 'C' compilers for SUN
Organization: Johns Hopkins Continuing Professional Programs
Distribution: net
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 00:38:48 GMT


Do there exist reliable benchmark methods for compilers?
If so, do you have any leads on written descriptions?
Thank you...

Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: pkerr@maccs.mcmaster.ca (Paul Kerr)
Subject: RealStones??
Organization: Department of Computer Science, McMaster University
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 06:48:27 GMT

 Sorry if this is an FAQ, but the FAQ's for this group are just not
making sense to me (maybe someone could explain these bizarre posts).

 Can someone point me to a site that has the source for the realstone
benchmark. If anyone has any experience running these on a RS/6000
that would also be welcome.

	Cheers, Paul

Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: eugene@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Subject: [l/m 3/17/92] Other misc. benchmarks (26/28)		c.be FAQ
Keywords: who, what, where, when, why, how
Organization: NAS Program, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 12:25:21 GMT
Reply-To: eugene@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)

26	Other miscellaneous benchmarks	<This panel>
27
28	References
1	Introduction to the FAQ chain and netiquette
2
3	PERFECT
4
5	Performance Metrics
6
7	Music to benchmark by
8	Benchmark types
9	Linpack
10
11	NIST source and .orgs
12	Measurement Environments
13	SLALOM
14
15	12 Ways to Fool the Masses with Benchmarks
16	SPEC
17	Benchmark invalidation methods
18
19	WPI Benchmark
20	Equivalence
21	TPC
22
23
24
25	Ridiculously short benchmarks

RhosettaStone:
Speech synthesis and recognition benchmark:
	e.g., How to recognize speech.
        How to wreck a nice beach.
An interesting benchmark because it does not take a machine to become confused.
Who: me
What: examples of different problems in speech and language
recognition and synthesis.  The examples are collected for a naive
user community.  Those in the field are dealing with a highly specialized
media.  This file keeps the experts in check.
Where: eos.arc.nasa.gov.
How: confusion, discriminatory sounds
Further examples always sought.

                   ^ A  
                s / \ r                
               m /   \ c              
              h /     \ h            
             t /       \ i          
            i /         \ t        
           r /           \ e      
          o /             \ c    
         g /               \ t  
        l /                 \ u
       A /                   \ r
        <_____________________> e   
                Language
 
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: mjl-b@minster.york.ac.uk
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks,comp.arch
Subject: Chi Nguyen, DHL Systems Inc.
Date: 21 Jan 93 12:57:39 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of York, England

This message is for Chi Nguyen of DHL Systems Inc -- everyone else please
ignore the wasted bandwidth by pressing 'n' now:


Chi,

I've been trying to mail the relevant chapters of my report to you. However,
I get the following "unknown user" message from your machine:

   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
Connected to rodan:
>>> RCPT To:<cnguyen@rodan>
<<< 550 User unknown
550 cnguyen@rodan... User unknown

   ----- Unsent message follows -----

Can you sort this out at your end and mail me again?

Mat

| Mathew Lodge                      | "What think you, my lord, of... Love?" |
| mjl-b@minster.york.ac.uk          | "You mean rumpy-pumpy?"                |
| Langwith College, Uni of York, UK |  -- Blackadder II                      |
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: walter@zarquon.Eng.Sun.COM (Walter Bays)
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
Subject: Re: specint, specfloat, mips...
Date: 27 Jan 93 18:08:59 GMT
Reply-To: walter@zarquon.Eng.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: zarquon

In article 23823@cenaath.cena.dgac.fr, brasseur@stna.dgac.fr (Christophe Le Brasseur CAP SESA TERTIAIRE AG25) writes:
>Here are a few questions :
>==========================
>
>What exactly are specint and specfloat ?
>How can you compare spec to mips ?

I am emailing you the SPEC FAQ for this group, which may help you.

>We already made simulation of the system on sparc 10/30 and on Bull DPX2/360 >Bi-processor (a french computer with two 25Mhz 68040).

This is the best answer.  Nothing represents your own code better than
your own code.  You can use SPECint92 and SPECfp92 to get an idea of
CPU speed to decide which machines to test with your code.

>We looked at Sparc 10/52 and at RS6000.  ...
>We can also get a DPX2/380 with 4 processors (33 Mhz 68040) : 100 Mips (!?) 

Your description of the workload sounds multi-user and multi-threaded,
so you can use SPECrate_int92 and SPECrate_fp92 to rate overall system
compute capacity.  (See FAQ for the difference between the speed and
capacity measures.)

>So the point is : does my appplication use a lot of specints or a lot of specfloat ?

After running your code, the next best answer is to look at the
descriptions of the individual SPEC benchmarks and match them with your
application.  Then look at the SPECrates of those benchmarks most like
your application.  Finally you can make your own measurements or seek
advice on how much integer code is executed versus floating point code,
but also consider the source of the advice.  (I won't offer any here :-)

---
Speaking for myself, not for Sun nor for SPEC...
Walter Bays                                         walter.bays@eng.sun.com
Sun Microsystems,  2550 Garcia Ave.,  MTV15-404,  Mountain View,  CA  94043
(415) 336-3689     SPEC Steering Committee Chairman      FAX (415) 968-4873
From: YOUNG@tattoo.cs.widener.edu (Rob Young)
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
Subject: Re: i860 Paragon XP/S Fastest Computer of all??!!
Date: 27 Jan 1993 16:05:29 GMT
Organization: Widener News/Mail Gateway
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: tattoo.cs.widener.edu
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20

In <C1I4z2.E9D@iat.holonet.net> bwilliam@iat.holonet.net writes:

> facts are facts. The i860 is the fastest processor out there. They list
				   ^^^^^^^
				   ^^^^^^^

Oh yeah?  How come it isn't in the Guinness Book of World Records then? ;)

> pipeline, can each complete one instruction. At 40 Mhz, you begin to see
> that a claim of 40 Mips is MORE THAN %%%%%%% HONEST, and that a claim of 
> 80Mflops IS ALSO NO LIE!!!!!!
> 
> Can't you guys accept reality?
> 
	Whose reality?


	Intel and Sun seem to be in the same camp.  Sun claims their
	latest offering goes 59 MIPS.  Intel talks about the Pentium
	being a 100 MIP chip.  Meaningless.  Fortunately, DEC doesn't
	go around bragging that the Alpha processor is a 400 MIP chip.
	HP doesn't glory in the fact their latest chip cranks 99 MHz.
	They realize MIPs are meaningless as another poster points out.

				Rob


                                                     young@tattoo.cs.widener.edu
"...the sky is blue and so is the sea . . . What is the color when black is
burned?  What is the color?"    -- Neil Young
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: dfox@quack.sac.ca.us (David Fox)
Subject: Re: ENOUGH! Re: BSDI/USL Lawsuit -- More Bad News for Human Beings...
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'.
Date: 25 Jan 1993 21:26:31 UTC

In article <59066@dime.cs.umass.edu> yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:

>Read about Multics, Paid for by the US taxpayer; BCPL, paid for by the
>British taxpayer. Should AT&T pay royalties for each use of a function
>switch in UNIX source? If we are going to have aggressive protection of
>property rights in software and software concepts, the taxpayers should, of
>course, get their share. Agreed? 

Absolutely.  Anyone who's ever paid taxes in the US (and elsewhere) should
be entitled to a free copy of Unix.

>yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu



-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
in real life: david fox            email: dfox@quack.sac.ca.us
5479 Castle Manor Drive,                  
San Jose, CA 95129                 "Thanks for letting me change some
USA                                 magnetic patterns on your HD" -me
408-253-7992                        
"You've just won an absolutely FREE trip to the Isles of Langerhans" -me
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jason@retina.anatomy.upenn.edu (Jason Ehrlich)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Where to get WIRED magazine?
Date: 28 Jan 93 02:03:47 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Neuroscience, U. of Pennsylvania

Greetings net,

We've all heard a lot about the new magazine called WIRED which
supposedly hit the streets on the 26th. Anyone actually _seen_ it or
know where to get it? The big bookstores in Philly don't have it
yet...Barnes & Noble hadn't even heard of it. 

I remember someone posted an e-mail address for the publishers, but I
can't find that anywhere...if someone could point me in the right
direction, I'd much appreciate it.

Best, if someone could post some info about the first issue, to
let everyone know what's going on. 

thanks!
jason

-- 
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Jason Ehrlich *  jason@retina.anatomy.upenn.edu (or jehrlich@aol.com)       *
SysOp, *StarLine* Information Systems - Data (215) 635-2341 (v32bis)        *
"The Universe is Change; Our Life is what Our Thoughts Make It." - Antoninus*
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: EFF and its growing pains...
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 06:25:01 GMT

In article <1993Jan26.002006.13035@clarinet.com> brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton) writes:
>In article <1993Jan25.181210.7552@netcom.com> strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>>losses, management, and some facilities. Someone is paying for that, and it
>>isn't the stockholders or the government. That leaves you and me, boys and
>>girls. Thus we are paying more than we would have if the cross-subsidy were
>
>Is it not possible that advanced technology is paying for it, by making the
>service cheaper to deliver, leaving the competitors more money to spend on
>marketing?

But AT&T, via Bell Labs, pushed technology. Thus we could have expected at
least as advanced technology (probably more because all the wasteful stuff
to make other carriers compatible would have been unnecessary) from an
unsplit AT&T. In other words, if the advanced techology paid for the
duplication in the presence of breakup, in the absence of breakup it would
have led to even lower rates. Q.E.D.

>
>Even if that's not true you will find that many believe that it is better
>to pay more for competitive service than you would pay to a regulated
>monopoly.  Not all are swayed, as you are, by the purely utilitarian
>argument.  Many feel that having the competitors around has many side
>benefits, in terms of the efforts they make to please their customers,
>the incentives for research and customer service.  The enforced monopolies
>have little incentive for this, and it shows.  "We don't care, we don't have
>to, we're the phone company" -- that was more than an SNL comedy sketch.

If you have to pay more for "competitive service" than for a regulated
monopoly, then  by definition you've proven it's not competitive. In fact,
what we have now is even worse than a regulated monopoly--it is an
unregulated oligopoly and we see from the various carriers' pricing that
they are colluding in all but name.

>The only real natural monopoly is the cable right of way going down the
>street.  I admit you can't just have everybody digging up the road and
>stringing wires on the poles.  So regulate that by having the city put
>cable conduits in and lease the right to run cables through them.  But
>that's about it.

You should read some texts on this subject if you think this. This isn't the
place for a public utility theory course.

Finally (and please don't take this personally), since you work for
Clarinet, which is a commercial user of the net, I need to ask if you are
special pleading on this issue. To forestall an equally fair question of me,
I have no economic or job interest in any commercial or government provider
or wannabe provider on the net.

Best;
David
-- 
David Sternlight
RIPEM Public Key on server  --  Consider it an envelope for your e-mail

Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: EFF and its growing pains...
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
	<1993Jan21.115644.24610@eff.org> <1993Jan21.172021.5930@netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 19:31:17 GMT

DS> == David Sternlight <strnlght@netcom.com>

 DS> If the funds were given to individual institutions, they might not be
 DS> used for the specific purposes which justified those funds in the
 DS> first place, just as if "lighthouse money" were given to individual
 DS> shipowners, they might not produce the "right" lighthouses in the
 DS> "right" places, considering the public interest at large rather than
 DS> the private interests of individual shipowners.

One suggestion has been to give the funds to institutions in the form of
"network choice vouchers".  Obviously this entails some bureaucracy in
picking the "recognized" providers, but probably less than that in
overseeing the expenditures of "normal money" would.

Let's say a researcher gets a grant, and gets a "network voucher" good for
$250/yr as part of it.  They could get a 20-hour-a-month account on World,
they could give it to their campus network staff as their part of the
cost-sharing on the $2000/mo high-speed connection, they could get a SLIP
connection from PSI, et. al.

They'd have a hard time spending it on pizzas for their grad students
(unless of course the local pizza joint wanted a network connection and was
willing to give $250 in pizzas in trade).
--
 * Christopher Davis * <ckd@eff.org> * <ckd@kei.com> * [CKD1] * MIME * RIPEM *
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: Danny Weitzner <djw@eff.org>
Subject: Re: EFF and its growing p
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A78CBD5E1002AC6A@j-q-adams.eff.org>
X-Xxdate: Wed, 27 Jan 93 03:29:50 GMT
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d17
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 03:25:50 GMT

In article <C1JKsu.G7H@demon.co.uk> Graham Toal,
gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk writes:
>I'd better go back and re-read it, but I *think* part of the EFF stand
was
>that ISDN should be rated the same as a voice line.

There are usually going to be two components of ISDN prices.  First, a
fixed monthly cost, and second, a usage sensitive (per minute, etc.)
part.  The fixed monthly cost may be a little higher than basic voice
rates because there are extra costs incurred in providing ISDN service --
ie. new line cards.  As to the usage sensitive part, if it is charged at
all we are advocating that it should be exactly the same as measured
voice service.  In a digital switch, there is no difference in the cost
of carrying a 64kb digital data channel or a plain old voice channel.
!7



x

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Daniel J. Weitzner                       202-544-3077 (voice)
Senior Staff Counsel                     202-547-5481 (fax)
Electronic Frontier Foundation           djw@eff.org
666 Pennsylvania Ave, SE
Washington, DC 20003
!!!U^!l|!!!UNu!a!Oz|!!!!!!!!O!!%%!!!!!!!!^!!
Mw!!>`!!`%y!JV\w
`!!!!I!```g!+f!!g!U
x*@!
!!:!!!!
u!!g!I!```!&!!g!!y!!!!!![!!!	!Vw
!!!Vw!!g`!``!!!`!*!U^!l|!	!g`!``!!!]!)!!!d!!
ff!!!!!!Vw!7!!!n!p|!!)!!!
Vw
!Vw
!<`l|``!!T!9!!(!!Vw
|``!l|!Se!K#!!p|g`
















H

-:LaserWriter

Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: fig@eff.org (Cliff Figallo)
Subject: Re: Summary for Berman (Was Re: One good th...)
Originator: fig@eff.org
Organization: The Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 19:20:32 GMT

Graham, all I can say is that if you truly believe that you are seeing 
things so clearly, if you truly believe that EFF is what you say it is,
if you are so committed to repeating your accusations over and over again,
thoroughly scolding us for all of what you believe is a misguided and
unethical operation, you should focus all this insight and strong feeling
on Doing It Right.  There is plenty of room in the world for other
organizations to do what you believe EFF should be doing.  We encourage
diversity.  We don't want to be everything to everyone.  If some other
group can make civil liberties online a reality sooner than EFF, more 
power to 'em.  I'll join up, too.

I can tell you, as if you have not guessed, that the board of EFF is 
committed to the path it is on until it is proven or becomes evident
that this is the wrong way to accomplish its goals.  Your view is your
own.  It is shared by some.  It is not shared by many others.  The 
people we met with in Atlanta are EFF members with just as valid views
of the world as you.  (I feel ridiculous having to tell you such 
basic stuff.)

-- 
                    <<*>><<*>><<*>><<*>><<*>><<*>>                         
Cliff Figallo                                     fig@eff.org
Electronic Frontier Foundation                    (617)864-0665 (voice)
Online Communications                             (617)864-0866 (fax)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: Steve Jackson Games trial
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 05:25:37 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.183127.2732@netcom.com> strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>
>In the report on the first day of the trial, Steve Figallo's message says:
>"She also didn't know there was a special law for publishers regarding
>searches.
>
>Could we hav e some details on this special law, please?

There is no "Steve Figallo."

The law in question is 42 USC 2000aa, the Privacy Protection Act of 1980.

It was passed in response to the late '70s Supreme Court case Zurcher v.
Stanford Daily. It requires that law enforcement use subpoenas rather than
search warrants to seek information from publishers.



--Mike




-- 
Mike Godwin,    |"I'm waiting for the one-man revolution
mnemonic@eff.org| The only one that's coming."
(617) 864-0665  |                           
EFF, Cambridge  |                   --Robert Frost 
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk