From owner-chemistry;at;ccl.net  Fri Jul 21 13:11:33 1995
Received: from remcure.bmb.wright.edu  for cletner -x- at -x- remcure.bmb.wright.edu
	by www.ccl.net (8.6.10/930601.1506) id MAA00510; Fri, 21 Jul 1995 12:46:23 -0400
Received: by remcure.bmb.wright.edu (931110.SGI/921111.SGI.AUTO)
	for CHEMISTRY |-at-| ccl.net id AA11466; Fri, 21 Jul 95 15:40:13 -0400
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 15:33:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: Charles Letner <cletner-: at :-remcure.bmb.wright.edu>
Subject: RE:Benchmarks inital summary
To: Computational Chemistry List <CHEMISTRY*- at -*ccl.net>
Message-Id: <Pine.3.07.9507211520.B11275-a100000%!at!%remcure.bmb.wright.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


Hello,
	Yesterday I posted a question about benchmarking software.  I have
gotten a number of inital responses.  Most indicate that "wall clock" time
is probably one of the better benchmarks.  The most common reason: it
takes into account issues such as multipule processors, memory swapping,
etc..  To eliminate factors such as other jobs and other users one
indiviual mentioned that they make the machine unavailable to other users
while the benchmark job is running.
	I will post a full summary next week that includes the response I
have already recieved as well as any I recieve over the weekend.
Thanks to everyone who responded.
Chuck 

Charles Letner
Wright State University
Department of Biochemistry
Dayton, OH 45435
e-mail: cletner $#at#$ remcure.bmb.wright.edu