On Aug 27, 2009, at 7:36 AM, Simon Urbanek wrote:

> The tests used are from http://r.research.att.com/benchmarks
> (R 2.9.2 release was used but admittedly the OS version varied)
> Clearly, benchmarks never tell the full story and there may be uses  
> that take advantage of the one or another architecture, but the  
> bottom line is that Nehalems are not universally faster, so don't  
> throuw your Harpertowns out just yet ;).

What was the memory configuration for these test systems? I would  
expect any differences there could account for significant variation  
as well.

Thanks,
John
	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

