2023-05-15-1903 AMD EPYC 7313P 16-Core testing with a Supermicro H12SSW-NTR v1.02 (2.5 BIOS) and ASPEED on Rocky Linux 8.6 via the Phoronix Test Suite. 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT: Processor: AMD EPYC 7313P 16-Core @ 3.00GHz (16 Cores / 32 Threads), Motherboard: Supermicro H12SSW-NTR v1.02 (2.5 BIOS), Chipset: AMD Starship/Matisse, Memory: 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT/s 18ASF4G72PDZ-3G2F1, Disk: 3 x 3841GB KCM6XRUL3T84 + 2 x 960GB Micron_7450_MTFDKBA960TFR, Graphics: ASPEED, Network: 2 x Broadcom BCM57416 NetXtreme-E Dual-Media 10G RDMA OS: Rocky Linux 8.6, Kernel: 4.18.0-372.32.1.el8_6.x86_64 (x86_64), Compiler: GCC 8.5.0 20210514, File-System: xfs, Screen Resolution: 1024x768 Sunflow Rendering System 0.07.2 Global Illumination + Image Synthesis Seconds < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 0.638 |================================================ PyBench 2018-02-16 Total For Average Test Times Milliseconds < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 1081 |================================================= Numpy Benchmark Score > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 435.15 |=============================================== ACES DGEMM 1.0 Sustained Floating-Point Rate GFLOP/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 9.325150 |============================================= CacheBench Write Cache MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 27095.39 |============================================= CacheBench Read Cache MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 2364.66 |============================================== Renaissance 0.14 Test: Genetic Algorithm Using Jenetics + Futures ms < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 1635.4 |=============================================== Renaissance 0.14 Test: Akka Unbalanced Cobwebbed Tree ms < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 10434.8 |============================================== Renaissance 0.14 Test: In-Memory Database Shootout ms < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 3670.9 |=============================================== Renaissance 0.14 Test: Finagle HTTP Requests ms < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 3838.2 |=============================================== Renaissance 0.14 Test: Apache Spark PageRank ms < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 2241.7 |=============================================== Renaissance 0.14 Test: Savina Reactors.IO ms < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 7553.0 |=============================================== Renaissance 0.14 Test: Apache Spark Bayes ms < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 711.2 |================================================ Renaissance 0.14 Test: Apache Spark ALS ms < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 1095.5 |=============================================== Renaissance 0.14 Test: ALS Movie Lens ms < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 5744.8 |=============================================== Renaissance 0.14 Test: Random Forest ms < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 577.5 |================================================ Renaissance 0.14 Test: Scala Dotty ms < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 703.4 |================================================ DaCapo Benchmark 9.12-MR1 Java Test: Tradebeans msec < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 3812 |================================================= DaCapo Benchmark 9.12-MR1 Java Test: Tradesoap msec < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 2845 |================================================= DaCapo Benchmark 9.12-MR1 Java Test: Eclipse msec < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 14777 |================================================ DaCapo Benchmark 9.12-MR1 Java Test: Jython msec < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 3385 |================================================= Bork File Encrypter 1.4 File Encryption Time Seconds < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 7.502 |================================================ Java SciMark 2.0 Computational Test: Jacobi Successive Over-Relaxation Mflops > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 1556.35 |============================================== Java SciMark 2.0 Computational Test: Dense LU Matrix Factorization Mflops > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 7414.02 |============================================== Java SciMark 2.0 Computational Test: Sparse Matrix Multiply Mflops > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 3042.49 |============================================== Java SciMark 2.0 Computational Test: Monte Carlo Mflops > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 1493.20 |============================================== Java SciMark 2.0 Computational Test: Composite Mflops > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 3064.84 |============================================== Sockperf 3.4 Test: Latency Ping Pong usec < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 2.426 |================================================ Sockperf 3.4 Test: Throughput Messages Per Second > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 685529 |=============================================== t-test1 2017-01-13 Threads: 2 Seconds < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 5.896 |================================================ t-test1 2017-01-13 Threads: 1 Seconds < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 17.56 |================================================ MBW 2018-09-08 Test: Memory Copy, Fixed Block Size - Array Size: 1024 MiB MiB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 16746.97 |============================================= MBW 2018-09-08 Test: Memory Copy - Array Size: 1024 MiB MiB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 23648.11 |============================================= Tinymembench 2018-05-28 Standard Memset MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 34214.1 |============================================== Tinymembench 2018-05-28 Standard Memcpy MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 24758.2 |============================================== Stream 2013-01-17 Type: Add MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 101668.9 |============================================= Stream 2013-01-17 Type: Triad MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 101927.5 |============================================= Stream 2013-01-17 Type: Scale MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 92252.3 |============================================== Stream 2013-01-17 Type: Copy MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 143783.9 |============================================= RAMspeed SMP 3.5.0 Type: Average - Benchmark: Floating Point MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 78331.77 |============================================= RAMspeed SMP 3.5.0 Type: Triad - Benchmark: Floating Point MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 80168.69 |============================================= RAMspeed SMP 3.5.0 Type: Scale - Benchmark: Floating Point MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 74184.23 |============================================= RAMspeed SMP 3.5.0 Type: Copy - Benchmark: Floating Point MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 76853.53 |============================================= RAMspeed SMP 3.5.0 Type: Add - Benchmark: Floating Point MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 81628.90 |============================================= RAMspeed SMP 3.5.0 Type: Average - Benchmark: Integer MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 76569.20 |============================================= RAMspeed SMP 3.5.0 Type: Triad - Benchmark: Integer MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 79094.12 |============================================= RAMspeed SMP 3.5.0 Type: Scale - Benchmark: Integer MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 67875.80 |============================================= RAMspeed SMP 3.5.0 Type: Copy - Benchmark: Integer MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 76919.63 |============================================= RAMspeed SMP 3.5.0 Type: Add - Benchmark: Integer MB/s > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 80944.42 |============================================= Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Sparse Random Projections / 100 Iterations Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Kernel PCA Solvers / Time vs. N Components Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Kernel PCA Solvers / Time vs. N Samples Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Hist Gradient Boosting Categorical Only Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Plot Non-Negative Matrix Factorization Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Plot Polynomial Kernel Approximation Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: 20 Newsgroups / Logistic Regression Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Hist Gradient Boosting Higgs Boson Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Plot Singular Value Decomposition Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Hist Gradient Boosting Threading Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Isotonic / Perturbed Logarithm Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Hist Gradient Boosting Adult Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Covertype Dataset Benchmark Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Sample Without Replacement Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: RCV1 Logreg Convergencet Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Isotonic / Pathological Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Plot Parallel Pairwise Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Hist Gradient Boosting Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Plot Incremental PCA Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Isotonic / Logistic Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: TSNE MNIST Dataset Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: LocalOutlierFactor Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Feature Expansions Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Plot OMP vs. LARS Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Plot Hierarchical Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Text Vectorizers Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Plot Fast KMeans Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Isolation Forest Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Plot Lasso Path Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: SGDOneClassSVM Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: SGD Regression Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Plot Neighbors Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: MNIST Dataset Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Plot Ward Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Sparsify Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Glmnet Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Lasso Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: Tree Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: SAGA Seconds < Lower Is Better Scikit-Learn 1.2.2 Benchmark: GLM Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: TensorFlow - Project Size: 4194304 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: TensorFlow - Project Size: 4194304 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: TensorFlow - Project Size: 1048576 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: TensorFlow - Project Size: 1048576 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: TensorFlow - Project Size: 262144 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: TensorFlow - Project Size: 262144 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: TensorFlow - Project Size: 65536 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: TensorFlow - Project Size: 65536 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: TensorFlow - Project Size: 16384 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: TensorFlow - Project Size: 16384 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: PyTorch - Project Size: 4194304 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: PyTorch - Project Size: 4194304 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: PyTorch - Project Size: 1048576 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: PyTorch - Project Size: 1048576 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: PyTorch - Project Size: 262144 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: PyTorch - Project Size: 262144 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Aesara - Project Size: 4194304 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Aesara - Project Size: 4194304 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Aesara - Project Size: 1048576 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Aesara - Project Size: 1048576 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: PyTorch - Project Size: 65536 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: PyTorch - Project Size: 65536 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: PyTorch - Project Size: 16384 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: PyTorch - Project Size: 16384 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numpy - Project Size: 4194304 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numpy - Project Size: 4194304 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numpy - Project Size: 1048576 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numpy - Project Size: 1048576 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numba - Project Size: 4194304 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numba - Project Size: 4194304 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numba - Project Size: 1048576 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numba - Project Size: 1048576 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Aesara - Project Size: 262144 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Aesara - Project Size: 262144 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numpy - Project Size: 262144 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numpy - Project Size: 262144 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numba - Project Size: 262144 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numba - Project Size: 262144 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Aesara - Project Size: 65536 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Aesara - Project Size: 65536 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Aesara - Project Size: 16384 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Aesara - Project Size: 16384 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numpy - Project Size: 65536 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numpy - Project Size: 65536 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numpy - Project Size: 16384 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numpy - Project Size: 16384 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numba - Project Size: 65536 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numba - Project Size: 65536 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numba - Project Size: 16384 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: Numba - Project Size: 16384 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: JAX - Project Size: 4194304 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: JAX - Project Size: 4194304 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: JAX - Project Size: 1048576 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: JAX - Project Size: 1048576 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: JAX - Project Size: 262144 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: JAX - Project Size: 262144 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: JAX - Project Size: 65536 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: JAX - Project Size: 65536 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: JAX - Project Size: 16384 - Benchmark: Isoneutral Mixing Seconds < Lower Is Better PyHPC Benchmarks 3.0 Device: CPU - Backend: JAX - Project Size: 16384 - Benchmark: Equation of State Seconds < Lower Is Better Mlpack Benchmark Benchmark: scikit_linearridgeregression Seconds < Lower Is Better Mlpack Benchmark Benchmark: scikit_svm Seconds < Lower Is Better Mlpack Benchmark Benchmark: scikit_qda Seconds < Lower Is Better Mlpack Benchmark Benchmark: scikit_ica Seconds < Lower Is Better Numenta Anomaly Benchmark 1.1 Detector: Contextual Anomaly Detector OSE Seconds < Lower Is Better Numenta Anomaly Benchmark 1.1 Detector: Bayesian Changepoint Seconds < Lower Is Better Numenta Anomaly Benchmark 1.1 Detector: Earthgecko Skyline Seconds < Lower Is Better Numenta Anomaly Benchmark 1.1 Detector: Windowed Gaussian Seconds < Lower Is Better Numenta Anomaly Benchmark 1.1 Detector: Relative Entropy Seconds < Lower Is Better Numenta Anomaly Benchmark 1.1 Detector: KNN CAD Seconds < Lower Is Better PyPerformance 1.0.0 Benchmark: pickle_pure_python Milliseconds < Lower Is Better PyPerformance 1.0.0 Benchmark: django_template Milliseconds < Lower Is Better PyPerformance 1.0.0 Benchmark: python_startup Milliseconds < Lower Is Better PyPerformance 1.0.0 Benchmark: regex_compile Milliseconds < Lower Is Better PyPerformance 1.0.0 Benchmark: crypto_pyaes Milliseconds < Lower Is Better PyPerformance 1.0.0 Benchmark: json_loads Milliseconds < Lower Is Better PyPerformance 1.0.0 Benchmark: raytrace Milliseconds < Lower Is Better PyPerformance 1.0.0 Benchmark: pathlib Milliseconds < Lower Is Better PyPerformance 1.0.0 Benchmark: nbody Milliseconds < Lower Is Better PyPerformance 1.0.0 Benchmark: float Milliseconds < Lower Is Better PyPerformance 1.0.0 Benchmark: chaos Milliseconds < Lower Is Better PyPerformance 1.0.0 Benchmark: 2to3 Milliseconds < Lower Is Better PyPerformance 1.0.0 Benchmark: go Milliseconds < Lower Is Better Java JMH Ops/s > Higher Is Better Cython Benchmark 0.29.21 Test: N-Queens Seconds < Lower Is Better ArrayFire 3.7 Test: BLAS CPU DaCapo Benchmark 9.12-MR1 Java Test: H2 msec < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 3773 |================================================= Java Gradle Build Gradle Build: Reactor Seconds < Lower Is Better Java SciMark 2.0 Computational Test: Fast Fourier Transform Mflops > Higher Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 1818.15 |============================================== Algebraic Multi-Grid Benchmark 1.2 Figure Of Merit > Higher Is Better HPC Challenge 1.5.0 Test / Class: G-HPL Netperf 2.7.0 Server: localhost - Test: UDP Stream - Server To Client - 10G - Duration: 10 Seconds Netperf 2.7.0 Server: localhost - Test: TCP Stream - Server To Client - Duration: 10 Seconds Netperf 2.7.0 Server: localhost - Test: TCP Stream - Client To Server - Duration: 10 Seconds Netperf 2.7.0 Server: localhost - Test: UDP Request Response - Duration: 10 Seconds Netperf 2.7.0 Server: localhost - Test: TCP Request Response - Duration: 10 Seconds Netperf 2.7.0 Server: localhost - Test: TCP Send File - Duration: 10 Seconds iPerf 3.1.3 Server Address: localhost - Server Port: 5555 - Duration: 10 Seconds - Test: UDP - Parallel: 20 Mbits/sec > Higher Is Better iPerf 3.1.3 Server Address: localhost - Server Port: 5555 - Duration: 10 Seconds - Test: TCP - Parallel: 20 Mbits/sec > Higher Is Better iPerf 3.1.3 Server Address: localhost - Server Port: 5555 - Duration: 10 Seconds - Test: UDP - 1000Mbit Objective - Parallel: 20 Mbits/sec > Higher Is Better iPerf 3.1.3 Server Address: localhost - Server Port: 5555 - Duration: 10 Seconds - Test: UDP - 100Mbit Objective - Parallel: 20 Mbits/sec > Higher Is Better Ethr 2019-01-02 Server Address: localhost - Protocol: HTTP - Test: Connections/s - Threads: 1 Mbits/sec > Higher Is Better Ethr 2019-01-02 Server Address: localhost - Protocol: UDP - Test: Connections/s - Threads: 1 Mbits/sec > Higher Is Better Ethr 2019-01-02 Server Address: localhost - Protocol: TCP - Test: Connections/s - Threads: 1 Mbits/sec > Higher Is Better Ethr 2019-01-02 Server Address: localhost - Protocol: HTTP - Test: Bandwidth - Threads: 1 Mbits/sec > Higher Is Better Ethr 2019-01-02 Server Address: localhost - Protocol: UDP - Test: Bandwidth - Threads: 1 Mbits/sec > Higher Is Better Ethr 2019-01-02 Server Address: localhost - Protocol: TCP - Test: Bandwidth - Threads: 1 Mbits/sec > Higher Is Better Ethr 2019-01-02 Server Address: localhost - Protocol: HTTP - Test: Latency - Threads: 1 Mbits/sec > Higher Is Better Ethr 2019-01-02 Server Address: localhost - Protocol: UDP - Test: Latency - Threads: 1 Mbits/sec > Higher Is Better Ethr 2019-01-02 Server Address: localhost - Protocol: TCP - Test: Latency - Threads: 1 Mbits/sec > Higher Is Better Sockperf 3.4 Test: Latency Under Load usec < Lower Is Better 8 x 32 GB DDR4-3200MT . 10.59 |================================================