Category: Future of performance evaluation

Something shiny

on May 22, 2014

As I mentioned in Looking for the next big thing, we’ve received some ideas for benchmarks recently. While there were several good ideas, the one that rose to the top of the list was a benchmark for Chrome-based devices.

For the past year or so, Chromebooks have been the fastest-growing segment of the PC market, so there’s a lot of interest. Given the rising profile of Chromebooks, a Chrome OS benchmark seems like a good fit with the existing XPRTs.

We’ve just started batting around ideas about what a Chrome OS benchmark might look like. Because the browser is the interface, WebXPRT is the natural place to start. However, WebXPRT runs on all platforms. We would like a Chrome benchmark to consider Chrome‑specific technologies like Google Native Client. If possible, it would also be great to get the battery life as well as performance.

Those are a few of our ideas. Do you have ideas about what you would like to see in a Chrome OS benchmark? If so, what would you consider most important for it to include? Let us know at benchmarkxprtsupport@principledtechnologies.com!

And remember, we’re always looking for new ideas. If there’s a benchmark you’d love to see, let us know.

Eric

Comment on this post in the forums

Posted in Collaborative benchmark development, Future of performance evaluation, Google Chrome, WebXPRT, What makes a good benchmark? |

Looking for the next big thing

By Eric Hale

on April 17, 2014

We recently introduced a new Web form in the members’ area to make it easier for you to submit new benchmark ideas. We’ve already received some interesting suggestions:

A benchmark to assess performance, battery life, and Chrome-specific technologies on Chromebooks
A benchmark to evaluate camera features and photo quality on phones and tablets
A benchmark for measuring the performance of cloud services
A benchmark for measuring the performance and battery life of iOS-based devices

Are you interesting in seeing any of these? Or do you have an idea no one has mentioned yet? We know there’s more out there! We like finding new things to measure and new ways to measure them, so please don’t hesitate to share your ideas!

Also, remember that the comment period for BatteryXPRT 2014 for Android CP2 ends on Monday, April 21. CP2 is the first XPRT to feature a Simplified Chinese UI. Please send in your comments. We’ll be aiming for a BatteryXPRT general release soon.

By the way, if you have a language you’d like to see and you’re willing to help with the translation, we’d love to talk to you!

Let us know what you think about potential new benchmarks, language options, or anything else on your mind at BenchmarkXPRTSupport@principledtechnologies.com.

Eric

Comment on this post in the forums

Posted in BatteryXPRT 2014 for Android, Benchmarking, Chinese, Collaborative benchmark development, Community Preview, Future of performance evaluation, What makes a good benchmark? |

Golden tickets

By Bill Catchings

on January 9, 2014

We (Bill and Mark) are on our way home from CES. There were lots of cool things to see, from electric cars to health and fitness wearables to all manner of mobile devices. And, more, a whole lot more.

We enjoyed seeing many of those products, but that was not our primary mission at the show. Our main goal was to spread the word about the XPRT benchmarks. We did that by visiting multiple mobile-device members and giving out to many of them a very special golden ticket. Yes, we’re talking a physical, Willy Wonka-style golden ticket. The two-sided tickets look really cool.

One side invites folks to be heard by joining the BenchmarkXPRT community. The other offers them the opportunity to have PT test devices for free with all the applicable XPRT benchmarks. All a vendor has to do to get this free testing is send the device to PT. We hope to get many devices in-house and to provide a great many results on our Web sites.

We wore the new BenchmarkXPRT shirts as we walked the floor.

We will soon be sending one shirt—and one golden ticket—to each member of the community. Please make sure we have your latest mailing address so we can ship those to you.

-Bill & Mark

Comment on this post in the forums

Posted in BenchmarkXPRT development community, CES, Future of performance evaluation, Performance benchmarking, Principled Technologies |

Home sweet home

By Bill Catchings

on June 9, 2011

After a long set of flights back from Computex in Taipei, I’m finally home in North Carolina. Unfortunately, I’m still not quite sure what time zone I’m in!

While awake in the middle of the night, I’ve been thinking about some of the things I saw at Computex. While I was there, it seemed like a jumble of notebooks, power supplies, gaming rigs, motherboards, cases, Hello Kitty accessories, and some things that I still don’t quite know what they were. Many of the things I saw were not brand new, but it was my first chance to see them up close. Some of them were of technologies still on the horizon like Intel’s Ultrabook concept and Microsoft’s Windows 8. I also saw all sorts of combinations of phones, 4G, and other devices.

One thing that stood out to me were the number and variety of tablets. They were in a variety of sizes (and screen resolutions). There were quite a few vendors and some were ones I would not have suspected but was pleasantly surprised to encounter, like Viewsonic and Shuttle. The OS choices included Android, WebOS, and MeeGo. ASUS had a couple of interesting hybrid approaches such as the Eee Pad Transformer and the Padfone. The former is a 10.1-inch tablet that plugs into a keyboard. The Padfone is a smartphone that can plug into the back of a larger (10.1-inch) touch screen to act as a tablet.

All of these tablet choices, as well as the iPad that they all must be compete against, left me wondering how to choose between them. Some part of the choice comes down to the size and features. As always, however, performance plays a key role. My tolerance for waiting on a tablet device is even lower than it is for waiting on my PC. The problem is how to make valid comparisons across such a wide range of platforms. I’d love to hear from you what you think about performance testing on tablets. Is it useful? What are the best ways to accomplish it?

Finally, thanks to all the folks who came by and visited our suite at Computex. I enjoyed getting the chance to meet some of the members of the HDXPRT Development Community. And, hopefully, I convinced more folks to join.

Bill

Comment on this post in the forums

Posted in Future of performance evaluation, Performance testing on tablets |

Our community’s goal

By Bill Catchings

on April 13, 2011

Computer system performance evaluation has a long and complex history. Many of the earliest tests were simple, short code snippets, such as Whetstone, that did little more than give an indication of how fast a particular computer subsystem was able to operate. Unfortunately, such simple benchmarks quickly lost their value, in part because they were very crude measures, and in part because software tools on the things they were measuring could easily optimize for them. In some cases, a compiler could even recognize a test and “optimize” the code by simply producing the final result!

Over time, though, benchmarks have become more complex and more relevant. Whole organizations exist and have existed to build benchmarks. Notable ones include the Ziff-Davis Benchmark Operation (ZDBOp), which the Ziff-Davis computer magazines funded in the 1990s and which Mark and I ran; the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation (SPEC), which its member companies fund and of which PT is a member; and the Business Applications Performance Corporation (BAPCo), which its member companies fund. Each of these organizations has developed widely used products, such as Winstone (ZDBOp), SPEC CPU (SPEC), and SYSmark (BAPCo). Each organization has also always faced challenges. In the case of ZDBOp, for example, Ziff Davis could no longer support the costs of developing its benchmarks, so they discontinued the group. SPEC continues to develop good benchmarks, but its process can sometimes yield years between versions.

The goal with HDXPRT and the HDXPRT Development Community (HDC) is to explore a new way to develop benchmarks. By utilizing the expertise and experience of a community of interested people, we hope to be able develop benchmarks in an open and collaborative environment while keeping them timely.

HDXPRT 2011 is the first test of this approach. We believe that it and subsequent versions of it, as well as other benchmarks, will give the industry a new model for creating world-class performance measurement tools.

If you’re not a member of the HDC, please consider joining us and helping define the future of performance evaluation.

Bill

Comment on this post in the forums

Posted in Collaborative benchmark development, Future of performance evaluation, HDXPRT development process, Performance benchmarking | Tagged Community, HDXPRT |

Category: Future of performance evaluation

Something shiny

Looking for the next big thing

Golden tickets

Home sweet home

Our community’s goal

Check out the other XPRTs: