Talk:Benchmark (computing)

message: I think there are two types of benchmarks in computer science: Hardware and algorithm benchmarks. The article mainly focused on the first but what about algorithm or software benchmark? It does not focus on the comparison of hardware but on software performance. In academia, this is very important:   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ct2034 (talk • contribs) 10:21, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hardware vs Software Benchmark 

message: I miss a precise definition of workload in terms of computing. The wikipedia page for the word "workload" is not about computing and this page uses this term without defining it first.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.88.43.111 (talk) 08:07, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Workload 

message: Microbenchmarks get redirected here but it is not clear that they are exactly the same thing. Should they have a page of their own or at least something to define the difference? JBrusey (talk) 14:07, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Microbenchmarks 

message: A "B-class" article this large requires more than 3 references only cited once each in the entire article. There are whole sections with no references. § Music Sorter § (talk) 07:54, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Downgraded the article 

message: Google gives me 1400 hits - essentially the only interest in this is from its developer.  There are no independent reviews.  It is unlikely to be notable in the near future. TEDickey (talk) 16:48, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  ioblazer 

message: Looks like it's starting again for phones https://www.xda-developers.com/benchmark-cheating-strikes-back-how-oneplus-and-others-got-caught-red-handed-and-what-theyve-done-about-it/ 70.49.130.192 (talk) 06:55, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Benchmark Cheating 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Benchmark (computing). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080205031133/http://www.donutey.com/hardwaretesting.php to http://donutey.com/hardwaretesting.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:50, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In the article I'm missing an important aspect of benchmarks. I use benchmarks to measure and improve algorithms. There are algorithms that have no exactly defined output value, for example in image processing. So you have to measure not only its performance, but also the quality of its output (e. g. by checking how near the algorithm's output is to the human reference). The only part of the article that goes into that direction is under "challenges":
"Examples of unmeasured qualities of service include security, availability, reliability, execution integrity, serviceability, scalability"
But neither of these effects describes the challenge that I mentioned. Is there a separate article talking about that topic or do I miss something else?
pluckerwank (talk) 08:59, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing aspect 

message: Should this article mention that MIPS is sometimes used for actual instruction rates, but more often as a benchmark value?  In the early days, especially with word addressed machines, the amount of computation done by a single instruction was about the same between machines, such that instruction rates made some sense. Later on, as ratios between machines, MIPS was used without the connection to actual instruction counts. Gah4 (talk) 23:51, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  MIPS 

message: This article requires a major revision to bring it up-to-date addressing the following issues: The provided definitions and discussion are rather outdated and inaccurate. The article assumes a very narrow scope of benchmarking missing the developments from the last two decades. References are outdated, e.g., the cited definition of benchmarking (from 1986) is rather narrow; the referenced textbook on the topic is from 1993, although up-to-date textbooks focus on the topic are available. The scope of benchmarking has in the meantime expanded to cover: (1) further system attributes (e.g., energy efficiency, reliability, resilience, or security) in addition to classical performance aspects and (2) further application scenarios (rating tools, research benchmarks). The provided classification of benchmarks is incomplete, inaccurate, and misleading. The provided list of example common benchmarks is mostly deprecated.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:810D:ABC0:C9E0:501E:1F2A:CDEE:A3C5 (talk) 13:46, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated sources 

message: It may be that I misheard, that it's not canned, but rather sth similar sounding. It seems it refers to benchmarking with games or benchmarking games, specifically "[it's not a problem] scripting performance testing for games that include canned benchmarks". Found one mention in text of it online here. It seems it's quite important for automating benchmarking, so if somebody knows what that is about it would be good to add it to the aticle. Setenzatsu.2 (talk) 07:10, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canned benchmarks??