JMarks seems to be simply the average of the 3 measurements. Back before SSD drives, the measurements were usually in the same range. Jim's first entry here was Math - 1775, Image - 1883, Database - 1684. With SSDs we now often see an Image value that is over twice the Math score, with one run having an Image score 3.5 times the Math score. It's fun to see who can get the best score, but over the years it seems that increases have moved from increases in CPU speed to increases in SSD and file handling speeds. That raises the question as to whether JMark is still a useful measurement of overall system performance, especially since most people do not do much with Images. In addition, one of the common uses of MC now is Video. Should there be a Video component to the test? You can always look at the individual scores but should there be 3 results reported - JMark Audio, JMark Image, and JMark Video with appropriate weightings for each component? Food for thought.
Author
Topic: Should JRMark be Updated? (Read 1509 times)