BenchmarkXPRT Blog banner

Category: White papers

Coming soon: a white paper about the CloudXPRT web microservices workload

Soon, we’ll be expanding our portfolio of CloudXPRT resources with a white paper that focuses on the benchmark’s web microservices workload. While we summarized the workload in the Introduction to CloudXPRT white paper, the new paper will discuss the workload in much greater detail.

In addition to providing practical information about the web microservices installation packages and minimum system requirements, the paper describes the workload’s test configuration variables, structural components, task workflows, and test metrics. It also discusses interpreting test results and the process for submitting results for publication.

As we’ve noted, CloudXPRT is one of the more complex tools in the XPRT family, with no shortage of topics to explore further. We plan to publish a companion overview for the data analytics workload, and possible future topics include the impact of adjusting specific test configuration options, recommendations for results reporting, and methods for analysis.

We hope that the upcoming Overview of the CloudXPRT Web Microservices Workload paper will serve as a go-to resource for CloudXPRT testers, and will answer any questions you have about the workload. Once it goes live, we’ll provide links in the Helpful Info box on CloudXPRT.com and the CloudXPRT section of our XPRT white papers page.

If you have any questions, please let us know!

Justin

The Introduction to CloudXPRT white paper is now available!

Today, we published the Introduction to CloudXPRT white paper. The paper provides an overview of our latest benchmark and consolidates CloudXPRT-related information that we’ve published in the XPRT blog over the past several months. It describes the CloudXPRT workloads, choosing and downloading installation packages, submitting CloudXPRT results for publication, and possibilities for additional development in the coming months.

CloudXPRT is one of the most complex tools in the XPRT family, and there are more CloudXPRT-related topics to discuss than we could fit in this first paper. In future white papers, we will discuss in greater detail each of the benchmark workloads, the range of test configuration options, results reporting, and methods for analysis.

We hope that Introduction to CloudXPRT will provide testers who are interested in CloudXPRT with a solid foundation of understanding on which they can build. Moving forward, we will provide links to the paper in the Helpful Info box on CloudXPRT.com and the CloudXPRT section of our XPRT white papers page.

If you have any questions about CloudXPRT, please let us know!

Justin

The Introduction to AIXPRT white paper is now available!

Today, we published the Introduction to AIXPRT white paper. The paper serves as an overview of the benchmark and a consolidation of AIXPRT-related information that we’ve published in the XPRT blog over the past several months. For folks who are completely new to AIXPRT and veteran testers who need to brush up on pre-test configuration procedures, we hope this paper will be a quick, one-stop reference that helps reduce the learning curve.

The paper describes the AIXPRT toolkits and workloads, adjusting key test parameters (batch size, level of precision, number of concurrent instances, and default number of requests), using alternate test configuration files, understanding and submitting results, and accessing the source code.

We hope that Introduction to AIXPRT will prove to be a valuable resource. Moving forward, readers will be able to access the paper from the Helpful Info box on AIXPRT.com and the AIXPRT section of our XPRT white papers page. If you have any questions about AIXPRT, please let us know!

Justin

Odds and ends

Today, we want to share quick updates on a few XPRT topics.

In case you missed yesterday’s announcement, the CrXPRT 2 Community Preview (CP) is now available. BenchmarkXPRT Development Community members can access the preview using a direct link we’ve posted on the CrXPRT tab in the XPRT Members’ Area (login required). This tab also provides a link to the CrXPRT 2 CP user manual. You can find a summary of what’s new with CrXPRT 2 in last week’s blog. During the preview period, we allow testers to publish CP test scores. Note that CrXPRT 2 overall performance test scores and battery life measurements are not comparable to those from CrXPRT 2015.

We’ll soon be publishing our first AIXPRT whitepaper, Introduction to AIXPRT. It will summarize the AIXPRT toolkits and workloads; how to adjust test parameters such as batch size, levels of precision, and concurrent instances; how to use alternate test configuration files; and how to understand test results. When the paper is available, we’ll post it on the XPRT white papers page and make an announcement here in the blog.

Finally, in response to decreased downloads and usage of BatteryXPRT, we have ended support for the benchmark. We’re always monitoring usage of the XPRTs so that we can better direct our resources to the current needs of users. We’ve removed BatteryXPRT from the Google Play Store, but it is still available for download on BatteryXPRT.com.

If you have any questions about CrXPRT 2, AIXPRT, or BatteryXPRT, please let us know!

Justin

WebXPRT: What would you like to see?

At over 412,000 runs and counting, WebXPRT is our most popular benchmark. From the first release in 2013, it’s been popular with device manufacturers, developers, tech journalists, and consumers because it’s easy to run, it runs on almost anything with a web browser, and it evaluates device performance using the types of web-based tasks that people are likely to encounter on a daily basis.

With each new version of WebXPRT, we analyze browser development trends to make sure the test’s underlying web technologies and workload scenarios adequately reflect the ways people are using their browsers to work and play. BenchmarkXPRT Development Community members can play an important part in that process by sending us feedback on existing tests and suggestions for new workloads to include.

For example, when we released WebXPRT 3, we updated the photo workloads with new images and a deep learning task used for image classification. We also added an optical character recognition task in the Encrypt Notes and OCR scan workload, and combined part of the DNA Sequence Analysis scenario with a writing sample/spell check scenario to simulate online homework in an all-new Online Homework workload.

Consider for a moment what an ideal future version of WebXPRT would look like for you. Are there new web technologies or workload scenarios that you would like to see? Would you be interested in an associated battery life test? Should we include experimental tests? We’re interested in what you have to say, so please feel free to contact us with your thoughts or questions.

If you’re just now learning about WebXPRT, we offer several resources to help you better understand the benchmark and its range of uses. For a general overview of why WebXPRT matters, watch our video titled What is WebXPRT and why should I care? To read more about the details of the benchmark’s development and structure, check out the Exploring WebXPRT 3 white paper. To see WebXPRT 2015 and WebXPRT 3 scores from a wide range of processors, visit the WebXPRT 3 Processor Comparison Chart.

We look forward to hearing from you!

Justin

Transparent goals

Recently, Forbes published an article discussing a new report on phone battery life from Which?, a UK consumer advocacy group. In the report, Which? states that they tested the talk time battery life of 50 phones from five brands. During the tests, phones from three of the brands lasted longer than the manufacturers’ claims, while phones from another brand underperformed by about five percent. The fifth brand’s published battery life numbers were 18 to 51 percent higher than Which? recorded in their tests.

Folks can read the article for more details about the tests and the brands. While the report raises some interesting questions, and the article provides readers with brief test methodology descriptions from Which? and one manufacturer, we don’t know enough about the tests to say which set of claims is correct. Any number of variables related to test workloads or device configuration settings could significantly affect the results. Both parties may be using sound benchmarking principles in good faith, but their test methodologies may not be comparable. As it is, we simply don’t have enough information to evaluate the study.

Whether the issue is battery life or any other important device spec, information conflicts, such as the one that the Forbes article highlights, can leave consumers scratching their heads, trying to decide which sources are worth listening to. At the XPRTs, we believe that the best remedy for this type of problem is to provide complete transparency into our testing methodologies and development process. That’s why our lab techs verify all the hardware specs for each XPRT Weekly Tech Spotlight entry. It’s why we publish white papers explaining the structure of our benchmarks in detail, as well as how the XPRTs calculate performance results. It’s also why we employ an open development community model and make each XPRT’s source code available to community members. When we’re open about how we do things, it encourages the kind of honest dialogue between vendors, journalists, consumers, and community members that serves everyone’s best interests.

If you love tech and share that same commitment to transparency, we’d love for you to join our community, where you can access XPRT source code and previews of upcoming benchmarks. Membership is free for anyone with a verifiable corporate affiliation. If you have any questions about membership or the registration process, please feel free to ask.

Justin

Check out the other XPRTs:

Forgot your password?