[ Thanks to steffen for this link.
]
By Marty Pitts, Linux
Today
Spec.org, the web site for the Standard Performance Evaluation
Corporation, has published their latest SPECweb99 Benchmark for
about 20 computer systems. Their mission is: “To establish,
maintain, and endorse a standardized set of relevant benchmarks and
metrics for performance evaluation of modern computer systems.”
The SPECweb99
Benchmark is: “the next-generation SPEC benchmark for
evaluating the performance of World Wide Web Servers. As the
successor to SPECweb96, SPECweb99 continues the SPEC tradition of
giving Web users the most objective and representative benchmark
for measuring a system’s ability to act as a web server. In
response to rapidly advancing Web technology, the SPECweb99
benchmark includes many sophisticated and state-of-the-art
enhancements to meet the modern demands of Web users of today and
tomorrow.”
Spec.org has just published the “Second Quarter
2000 SPECweb99 Results”. Twenty one machines from various
vendors including IBM, Dell, Compaq, and Hewlett Packard were
tested and scored based on their ability to handle “Conforming
Simultaneous Connections”.
The interesting part is that two of the machines are from Dell,
with almost exactly the same hardware and yet very different
benchmark results.
Both machines are Dell PowerEdge 6400/700, one running Red Hat
Tux 1.0 and the other running Windows 2000 Advanced Server. Both
were running with 4 CPU’s (700MHz Pentium III Xeon), 4 Network
Controllers and 8GB of RAM.
There were a few differences in the hardware: the W2K machine
had 7 9GB 10kRPM hard drives with a Dell PERC2 Disk Controllers and
the Tux 1.0 machine had 5 9GB 10kRPM hard drives with an Adaptec
AIC-7899 SCSI Disk Controller. In addition, the Client machines,
while being very similar in configuration, had the same brand of
Network Controller (Alteon) but a different model number for the
W2K test (AceNIC PCI) than the one for the Tux 1.0 test (AceNIC
1000SX).
Here is the interesting part: The W2K machine received a score
of SPECweb99 = 1598, which means that it was able to handle a
median of 1598 Conforming Simultaneous Connections. The Red Hat Tux
1.0 machine received a score of SPECweb99 = 4200, which means that
is was able to handle a median of 4200 Conforming Simultaneous
Connections.
The full disclosure page for the Windows 2000 machine may be
found
here. The full disclosure page for the Red Hat Tux 1.0 machine
may be found
here.
What does this mean? In the real world, probably not as much as
it would seem. Benchmarks in general are typically set up in an
ideal environment. Real world environments tend to be quite
different. However, this does indicate that Linux is moving in the
right direction.
I freely admit that I am not a hardware expert. So my question
to those who know more about hardware than I do is: Could the
seemingly minor hardware differences result in this huge difference
in the results of the tests? Please feel free to comment below on
these results and in benchmarks in general.