On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 11:05 AM, Red Roo <redrooz@yahoo.com> wrote:

> ----- Original Message ----
> From: xiaoming gu <xiaoming.gu@gmail.com>
> To: r-sig-hpc@r-project.org
> Sent: Tue, April 6, 2010 7:45:05 PM
> Subject: [R-sig-hpc] looking for available R benchmarks
>
> Hi, all. I'm a stranger in R and wondering whether there are some available
> standard benchmarks for R. I would like to know some workloads written in R
> and designed for the purpose similar to SPEC CPU2006. And each workload has
> several different input levels. Thanks very much.
>
> Xiaoming [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> _______________________________________________
>
> It might be helpful if you could clarify the intent of your question.
>
> Broadly speaking, there are two motivations for benching:
> a) Comparing the performance of different processors (the dependent
> variable) running the same R code (independent variable)
>
> b) Comparing the performance of different R codes (dependent variable)
> running on the same processor (independent variable)
>
> Approach (a) is the motivation behind the SPEC benching cartel. As far as
> I'm aware, the SPEC b/m doesn't contain any R codes but even if it did,
> their choice of code would not necessarily be the best choice for your
> purposes. You could, however, apply the same idea using R codes that you
> know and love. Although this is easy to say, it's not necessarily easy to do
> correctly. It's very easy to do a lot of work that is meaningless. That's
> one reason SPEC pre-packages the runtime codes and analysis.
>
> In approach (b), you compare code performance (e.g., execution times) on a
> fixed choice of processor, e.g., a machine that has already been purchased.
> That's what is reported here
> http://www.revolution-computing.com/products/benchmarks.php  The test rig
> is fixed as a Dell XPS Studio PC with 2.40GHz Intel Core 2 Quad processors,
> 6GB system RAM running Windows Server 2008. They then compare the
> performance of their REvolution R codes with R-2.7.2 from CRAN.
>
> Although your question would appear to be closer to (a) in intent, it's not
> clear to me that (b) might not be the better choice. I would need to know
> more.
>
> Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "different input levels."
>
> --Neil Gunther
>
Thanks for all your kindly replies. My intention is closer to (b). I'm
trying http://r.research.att.com/benchmarks/ and REvolution R.

"different input levels" is typically about running time. For example, a
very large input makes program run several hours but a small input only
takes less than one minute. With this feature, I can study R program
performance in a more flexible way.

Xiaoming

> ________________________________________________________________________
> TAKING THE PITH OUT OF PERFORMANCE http://perfdynamics.blogspot.com/
> Follow me on Twitter http://twitter.com/DrQz
> PERFORMANCE DYNAMICS COMPANY http://www.perfdynamics.com/
> Castro Valley, CA 94552
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

