benchmarking

They're a mixed bag because they're benchmarking libraries more than they're benchmarking runtimes.

The performance price for generating large amounts of extra code in the compiler is reasonably well understood, and not something that would be amenable to simply trying and benchmarking.

Alternately, a technical benchmarking-only system, where you try to identify how much their contribution is to page-load without respect to security/etc.

Oort Online is a benchmark of WebGL performance—WebGL is definitely worth benchmarking, but how common is it in people's daily browsing?

So while this was obviously a bit of hostile benchmarking, it doesn't seem like there was any need for special effort to get a discrediting result, simply benchmarking with other suites proved enough.

A little off topic, but is there any benchmarking software to compare embedded databases?

Backup management is lovely, caching system seems pretty performant from current benchmarking.

This is not a real site, they have a review from 4 months ago benchmarking a 990 Ti 24GB card with 'minesweeper' and 'solitaire'.

We do similar kind of benchmarking ourselves for our applications between cloud vendors and instance types (different families) and end up with large spread sheets.

Anyone aware of comprehensive location based benchmarking of all the VPS's?

I'd argue the converse: when you are benchmarking a CPU intensive application, the GPU is mostly idle and not generating much heat, giving you margin to push the CPU transistors harder.

Perhaps their benchmarking software didn't support AVX2 yet (Haswell/Broadwell) yet?