Recent content by Steven

I'd really appreciate the sqrt so we get the performance to the ^1.. But if you can give me a few days I was about to publish some analyses of the possible tests you mentioned so you can see how they behave

I think things got confused. The things that do change the ranking is: (1) whether you use volume ^1.5 vs vol^1 or (2) perf*perf (ie perf^2) vs sqrt(perf*perf) (i.e perf) Chinevo calculated "I think he meant (Volume in cm)^1.5 instead of (Volume in liters)^1.5 in original formula. In this case...

I think there's some fundamental misunderstanding or miscommunication here. Whether you use cm^3 or mm^3 or liters does not change either the formula bias nor the linearity. They are interchangeable statements like "6 in one hand, half dozen in the other"

Thanks Revo and others for continuing to consider this. After analyzing it again I don't think <1L breaks any of these formulas, they're all smooth functions in the domain (0,inf] I see where you're coming from but I think, unfortunately, the 1L delineation doesn't protect from some SoC Minis...

Thank you for understanding it was square performance Adding them (arithmetic mean) leads to imbalance between the scaling of the benchmarks. This is the point of geometric means: sqrt(cpu*gpu). In this simple equation the relative scaling is handled. It's quite simply taking the squared...

I think you are both misunderstanding, this formula isnt sqrt(performance) it's the sqrt(performance^2) ie performance ^1. As for Mini Builds... I agree there's an issue either way. I think that any build with integrated cpu should be separated anyway. The whole coolnesss of SFF is to keep the...

Hi all, We were talking about formulas and what would most accurately define the title "performance per liter". I've come up with a solution to this using the geometric mean (instead of the proposed arithmetic mean) of the performance numbers. Sqrt(cpu_r23*gpu_timespy)/Volume The benefit of...