mprime benchmark tests backwards?

[PerformanceTest]

Hello,
In utilizing the mprime Linux code to benchmark some PC units, I accidentally stumbled upon what appears on the surface to be a simple coding oversight.

Unless I'm confused (entirely possible!), when running the "Options/Benchmark" in mprime (#16 from Main Menu), the order the test sections are run in, and the order they are printed/reported as running in, appears inverted.

Inotherwords, the output states at first "Timing FFTs using 2 threads on 1 physical CPU.", however, if htop is run simultaneously, it is revealed that 4 cores are busy running.

Later on, the output states, "Timing FFTs using 8 threads on 4 physical CPUs.", however htop reveals only 1 core is busy.

It also follows that times (I assume per thread) get better as fewer cores are active and Intel Turbo-Boost can further increase the clock of a single core. (Instrumenting for core clock rates and voltages corroborates these findings.)

Although mprime is not intended as a benchmarking tool, it may be quite suitable for general benchmarking and verification of relative vectorized processor performance, and would be convenient if the printed results matched actual tests run.

I expect this is the result of a simple typo in a for loop, however, I am open to the possibility of user error.

Best regards,

[thyw]

Can confirm, tried out 64 bit mprime/prime95 29.7/9/10, when starting mprime bench at 1 thread the "top" shows 399% cpu, when jumps to 2 thread, it's 300%...
Windows: 100% then 75%, and times improve from "1 thread" to "2 thread".
But when looking into my past logs, the benchmarks show that the timings are improving as they should be. So definitely a mix.


_{I'm just guessing ahead with bs theories:
Maybe it "fills" the threads with nothing? Or those OSs cannot comprehend the load on 1 thread. Maybe it sees it as full utilization?? Or maybe this was always the case. How nobody noticed it before? Is this normal. Maybe it's intended?}

[Prime95]

mprime/prime95 does fill the empty cores with "do nothing" tasks. I don't remember why I did that. It's been a while, maybe something to do with turbo/speedstep.

I'll look at this later, I could easily have messed something up.

[Prime95]

I've improved setting affinities while benchmarking.

I've also made the do-nothing threads optional with the default being off.

[VictordeHolland]

Intel CPUs with the Turbo function ON will most likely clock higher if only 1 core is loaded.

For instance on my i5 2500k
Base 3.3GHz

Turbo:
1 core: 3.7GHz
2 core: 3.6GHz
3 core: 3.5GHz
4 core: 3.4GHz

Turbo frequencies per generation/CPU are listed in Intel's specification pdf's (I attached 2nd gen as an example).

If the CPU is overclocked, it's usually best to disable the Turbo function.

Speedstep lowers the frequency and voltage of the CPU to save power (for instance when the CPU is idle). IMHO it's only a useful feature in laptops. I'd happily let the CPU consume a few extra watts for the extra responsiveness on a desktop.