lame

If our other benchmarks were any indication, compiler flags seem to make or break our analysis of a processor.  However, lame 3.96.1 seemed one of those programs that did not readily enjoy optimizations; at least with the test file we used.  When we attempted to force any optimization, even - march or - O2, lame appeared to produce the same or worse results.

lame 3.96

GZip

GZip was installed straight from RPMs, so optimization flags are probably minimal. We used the 700MB test file from the lame encoding test as dummy data.

# time gzip -c sample.wav > /dev/null
GZip 1.3.5

 This becomes our first real world test where we see Intel come out ahead.  This coincides with what we saw on the previous page with the synthetic benchmark. 

Synthetic Benchmarks Encryption Benchmarks
Comments Locked

92 Comments

View All Comments

  • JGunther - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link

    Yeah... this reivew (to me) proves that Kris is a good, well-intentioned guy, as he put aside his own personal time to re-do these benchmarks. But the results within also prove how utterly inaccurate the first review was, thus justifying (some of) the criticism he recieved.

    I can see that you did learn at least one lesson, Kris; there are no claims in the conclusion of the Opteron "trouncing" the Xeon this time (even though such a remark may be justified now). :)
  • thatsright - Thursday, August 12, 2004 - link

    Now will all of you A-Holes get off KrizK's & AT editorial staff's back!!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now