Contest 0.51
Hi all,
here the contest results:
noload:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio 2.4.19 [3] 128.8 97 0 0 1.01 2.5.40 [3] 134.4 96 0 0 1.05 2.5.40-nopree [3] 133.7 96 0 0 1.04 2.5.41 [3] 136.5 96 0 0 1.07 2.5.41-mm2 [3] 134.8 96 0 0 1.05 2.5.42 [3] 134.8 96 0 0 1.05 2.5.42-mm2 [3] 135.5 96 0 0 1.06
process_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio 2.4.19 [3] 194.1 60 134 40 1.52 2.5.40 [3] 184.5 70 53 31 1.44 2.5.40-nopree [3] 286.4 45 163 55 2.24 2.5.41 [3] 192.6 68 59 32 1.50 2.5.41-mm2 [3] 193.4 66 68 34 1.51 2.5.42 [3] 187.6 68 58 32 1.46 2.5.42-mm2 [3] 186.0 69 60 31 1.45
io_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio 2.4.19 [3] 461.0 28 46 8 3.60 2.5.40 [3] 293.6 45 25 8 2.29 2.5.40-nopree [3] 269.4 50 20 7 2.10 2.5.41 [3] 342.7 41 34 9 2.68 2.5.41-mm2 [3] 251.1 54 21 8 1.96 2.5.42 [3] 304.5 45 28 9 2.38 2.5.42-mm2 [3] 254.6 53 20 8 1.99
It seems useful to me add a colum with CPU%+LCPU%. It is intersting to notice that 2.5.41 spend 41+9=50% CPU time for compiling and for the io_load while 2.5.42 spend 45+9=54% time. Can I say that 2.5.42 is "better" than 2.5.41 ?
read_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio 2.5.42 [3] 162.3 82 10 4 1.27 2.5.42-mm2 [3] 162.5 82 10 4 1.27
No difference here.
list_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio 2.5.42 [3] 154.2 85 0 6 1.20 2.5.42-mm2 [3] 155.1 85 0 6 1.21
No difference here.
mem_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio 2.4.19 [3] 161.1 80 38 2 1.26 2.5.40 [3] 163.0 80 34 2 1.27 2.5.40-nopree [3] 161.7 80 34 2 1.26 2.5.41 [3] 161.0 83 33 2 1.26 2.5.41-mm2 [3] 229.9 57 35 1 1.80 2.5.42 [3] 157.9 83 33 2 1.23 2.5.42-mm2 [3] 162.2 81 33 2 1.27
No difference here.
Comments ?
Paolo
Signature · 4 lines
Get your free email from www.linuxmail.org Powered by Outblaze