• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Measuring IPC Clock-for-Clock

O

OC-FTW

n00b
Joined
Nov 1, 2019
Messages
4
One thing that has been bothering me recently is having to measure instructions per clock at the same CPU frequency for all processors. If the processor is stuck at a certain static frequency, whether it is 2.5GHz or 2.8GHz and never changes, then shouldn't IPC comparison be valid across different processors set to different static frequency?
 
OC-FTW said:
One thing that has been bothering me recently is having to measure instructions per clock at the same CPU frequency for all processors. If the processor is stuck at a certain static frequency, whether it is 2.5GHz or 2.8GHz and never changes, then shouldn't IPC comparison be valid across different processors set to different static frequency?
Click to expand...


Yes, they should. But there are two reasons most sites prefer fixed frequency runs.

1. You see different turbo frequencies for different load levels. This means each benchmark will need you to provide an average core frequency to compute IPC.

2. It's easier for the reader to compare performance at thew same frequency, rather than having to do the math (performance/clock scaling between different frequencies) in their head. This is why smart reviewers will just perform all test at a fixed frequency.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top