0.00784314: 835 suit
</pre>
== Overall results ==
This section illustrates the overall results achieved by the benchmarks.
===STREAM===
{| class="wikitable"
|+
Overall results (ARM core frequency = 800 MHz)
! rowspan="2" |Function
! colspan="2" |Mito8M
! rowspan="2" |Axel Lite
efficiency
[%]
|-
!Best rate
[MB/s]
!Efficiency
[%]
|-
|Copy
|6770
|51.7
|14.0
|-
|Scale
|6093
|46.5
|13.8
|-
|Add
|5263
|40.1
|14.6
|-
|Triad
|4820
|36.8
|14.9
|}
{| class="wikitable"
|+
Overall results (ARM core frequency = 1300 MHz)
! rowspan="2" |Function
! colspan="2" |Mito8M
! rowspan="2" |Axel Lite
efficiency
[%]
|-
!Best rate
[MB/s]
!Efficiency
[%]
|-
|Copy
|7125
|54.3
|14.0
|-
|Scale
|7501
|57.2
|13.8
|-
|Add
|6762
|51.6
|14.6
|-
|Triad
|6354
|48.5
|14.9
|}
Apart from the increase over Axel Lite in absolute terms, it is noteworthy that Mito8M exhibits a significant improvement in terms of efficiency too, as shown in the above tables. This is especially true in the case of ARM core frequency set to 1300 MHz.
Another interesting thing to note is how the bandwidth is affected by the ARM core frequency. If it scaled linearly, we should have an improvement of 62.5% from 800 to 1300 MHz. The average bandwidth at 800 MHz is 5761 MB/s. At 1300 MHz, it is 6935 MB/s. Therefore, the increase is 20.4%. With regard to STREAM benchmark, the achieved bandwidth does not scale linearly with ARM core frequency.
Please see [https://www.cs.virginia.edu/stream/ this page] for more details about STREAM benchmark.
===LMbench===
For what regards the memory bandwidth, LMbench provides many results organized in different categories. For the sake of simplicity, the following tables details just a couple of categories. The full results are available for download [http://mirror.dave.eu/mito/Mito8M/lmbench-Mito8M.0-800MHz.txt here (ARM core frequency set to 800 MHz)] and [http://mirror.dave.eu/mito/Mito8M/lmbench-Mito8M.0-1300MHz.txt here (ARM core frequency set to 1300 MHz)].
{| class="wikitable"
|+Memory read bandwidth
! rowspan="2" |Buffer size
! colspan="2" |Bandwitdth
[MB/s]
|-
!ARM core frequency = 800 MHz
!ARM core frequency = 1300 MHz
|-
|512B
|1553
|2521
|-
|1kB
|1567
|2546
|-
|2kB
|1575
|2560
|-
|4kB
|1575
|2564
|-
|8kB
|1577
|2564
|-
|16kB
|1577
|2567
|-
|32kB
|1528
|2490
|-
| 0.065536 |64kB
|1531
|2494
|-
|128kB
|1547
|2530
|-
|256kB
|1552
|2526
|-
|512kB
|1514
|2518
|-
|1MB
|1318
|2181
|-
|2MB
|1430
|2148
|-
|4MB
|1420
|2108
|-
|8MB
|1423
|2038
|-
|16MB
|1420
|2116
|-
|32MB
|1365
|2117
|-
|64MB
|1393
|2035
|-
|128MB
|1382
|2035
|-
|256MB
|1372
|2050
|-
|512MB
|1367
|1998
|}
{| class="wikitable"
|+Memory write bandwidth
! rowspan="2" |Buffer size
! colspan="2" |Bandwitdth
[MB/s]
|-
!ARM core frequency = 800 MHz
!ARM core frequency = 1300 MHz
|-
|512B
|2932
|4771
|-
|1kB
|3048
|4956
|-
|2kB
|3100
|5046
|-
|4kB
|3136
|5097
|-
|8kB
|3135
|5101
|-
|16kB
|3150
|5120
|-
|32kB
|2864
|5127
|-
|64kB
|3033
|5071
|-
|128kB
|3093
|4886
|-
|256kB
|2956
|5056
|-
|512kB
|3024
|5054
|-
|1MB
|3075
|5092
|-
|2MB
|3095
|5116
|-
|4MB
|3121
|5118
|-
|8MB
|3137
|5120
|-
|16MB
|3145
|5121
|-
|32MB
|3146
|5120
|-
|64MB
|3146
|5125
|-
|128MB
|3147
|5123
|-
|256MB
|3150
|5124
|-
|512MB
|3144
|5125
|-
|1GB
|3146
|5124
|}
There are some interesting facts to stress:
* Read and write bandwitdth are not effected by the buffer size.
* They are significantly affected by the ARM core frequency. For instance, the improvement of the write bandwidth (about 62% when the buffer is 1GB) is practically the same of the increase in frequency.
For more information regarding LMbench, please see [http://lmbench.sourceforge.net/ this page].
===pmbw===
As defined by the author, <code>pmbw</code> is "a set of assembler routines to measure the parallel memory (cache and RAM) bandwidth of modern multi-core machines." It performs a myriad of tests. Luckily, it comes with a handful tool that plots the results—which are stored in a text file—in a series of charts. Again,the benchmark was run at two different ARM core frequencies, 800 and 1300 MHz.
The complete results and the charts are available at the following links:
*http://mirror.dave.eu/mito/Mito8M/pmbw-stats-Mito8M-800MHz.txt
*http://mirror.dave.eu/mito/Mito8M/pmbw-plots-Mito8M-800MHz.pdf
*http://mirror.dave.eu/mito/Mito8M/pmbw-stats-Mito8M-1300MHz.txt
*http://mirror.dave.eu/mito/Mito8M/pmbw-plots-Mito8M-1300MHz.pdf
Generally speaking, the charts exhibit significant declines in the performances when the array size is around the L1 and the L2 cache size.
For more details about <code>pmbw</code>, please refer to [https://panthema.net/2013/pmbw/ this page].
===stressapptest===
According to the documentation, stressapptest—which was developed at Google—is "a memory interface test. It tries to maximize randomized traffic to memory from processor and I/O, with the intent of creating a realistic high load situation in order to test the existing hardware devices in a computer."
{| class="wikitable"
|+
! rowspan="2" |Test
! colspan="2" |Bandwidth
[MB/s]
|-
!ARM core frequency = 800 MHz
!ARM core frequency = 1300 MHz
|-
|Memory copy
|5483
|5804
|}
The above table lists the achieved results when the benchmark was run as detailed in [[#Running_the_tests_4|this section]]. In this case, the different when running at different ARM core frequencies is very little.
For more information about stressapptest, please refer to [https://github.com/stressapptest/stressapptest this page].
==Useful links==
