SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: gnuman who wrote (41120)4/28/2000 8:41:00 AM
From: Dave B  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 93625
 
Gene,

I would like to see the industry and press agree on an industry standard set of BM's that de-politicizes the whole issue.

You realize, of course, that this will never happen. Each benchmark developer thinks that their benchmark is the "best". Just as people develop new products to be "better" than whatever exists, people will continue to develop new benchmarks and update the benchmarks they already use. And you have to keep developing new tests to benchmark new features in the technology (who would've guessed 15 years ago that we'd ever need a benchmark measuring the frames-per-second performance of PCs?). A "committee" would never be able to keep up with advances in technology.

My one wish is that the benchmark publishers publish the details of their tests completely. Then, at least, you could determine whether the test applied to the real world environment in which you expect to be working. If so, use the result. If not, don't.

In the absence of complete disclosure, I had been waiting anxiously for the PC World and PC Magazine results. They are, IMO, the least biased testers of all the testers I've seen and appear to have a minimal "personal agenda" (except to sell magazines). Also, as widely read publications, their benchmarks have the power to sway the most opinions. Obviously I was pleased with both sets of results <G>.

Dave