(no title)
chuankl | 1 year ago
For example, take 7-Zip Compression 22.01. The CPU Power Consumption Monitor chart states:
AmpereOne: Average 278.72W EPYC: Average 311.64W
But the fine print under that same chart states:
AmpereOne: 6968J per run EPYC: 14439J per run
By the Joules per run numbers, AmpereOne is far more power efficient than EPYC, requiring only less than half of the energy to complete a run.
In that case, how could the average power of EPYC to be only 11.8% higher than that of AmpereOne? For this benchmark EPYC is 14.2% faster than AmpereOne, and if the average power numbers are correct, the EPYC should have slightly lower Joules per run than AmpereOne.
That is not the only anomaly. For example, the CPU Power Consumption Monitor chart for John the Ripper 2023.03.14 also does not make sense.
rowinofwin|1 year ago
telgareith|1 year ago
Never-mind that these are all reduced to absurd levels, or biased.
My favorite was some site crapping on a SSD that only managed 3GiB/s for 100GiB of data, then dropped to 500meg or something. But, they didn't mention data transferred at all. Just speed vs time. Obviously pushing for that higher kickback on the ssd that costs 4x as much and uses 8x the power.