Results
SPECapc
Download/Order
Resources
|
The
Graphics Performance Characterization Group (SPEC/GPC):
Rules For Project Groups
Version 1.01
Last Updated: 02/09/2006
-
Overview
-
Project
Groups and Scope of Rules
-
Two project groups
exist under the umbrella of SPEC/GPC:
-
The rules contained in this
document shall apply to both project groups (SPECopc and SPECapc).
-
Each project group shall maintain
its own project group rules document, which shall apply in conjunction
with this document. -
SPECopc project rules -
SPECapc project rules
-
Where a project group's rule
overrides a rule in this document, this will be explicitly indicated
in that project group's rule document.
-
Should a new project group be
approved or an existing one dissolved, this document shall be
updated accordingly.
-
Membership
-
Membership
-
Membership in
the SPEC/GPC and its project groups is open to any organization
that has a direct and/or material interest in graphics or graphics-related
application performance benchmarking.
-
Membership in
one or more SPEC/GPC project groups leads to membership of SPEC/GPC.
-
Members are expected
but not required to be active participants developing and improving
the respective project group's benchmarks.
-
Members are entitled
to secure access to development code.
-
Members are entitled
to unlimited publication rights.
-
New members become
eligible for voting on the 2nd consecutive qualified meeting.
The first qualified meeting may have been attended prior to becoming
a member. Qualified meetings are defined in Section II.4.b.
-
A member maintains
voting rights by attending 1 out of the last 3 qualified meetings.
A member loses their voting rights upon missing 3 consecutive
qualified meetings.
-
A member regains
voting rights on attending a second consecutive qualified meeting.
-
Associate
Status
-
Associate status
is available to non-profit organizations.
-
All rights and
rules of the respective project group, GPC and SPEC apply to Associates
unless specifically stated otherwise.
-
Associates are
entitled to secure access to development code.
-
Associates do
not have voting rights.
-
Officers
and Elections
-
On an annual
basis the project groups will elect from their eligible voting
memberships the following officers:
-
Chairperson
-
Vice Chairperson
-
Secretary-Treasurer
-
The Chairperson's
responsibilities are to
-
conduct meetings,
-
send out the
agenda on time,
-
conduct votes
on time,
-
deal with outside
organizations such as the press,
-
represent and
respond on behalf of the group to external questions and queries,
-
interact with
the SPEC/GPC committee, and
-
police the
submission, review and appeal process.
-
The Vice-Chairperson's
responsibility is to do the chairperson's job when the chairperson
is not available, or if the chairperson is subject to a conflict
of interest.
-
The Secretary-Treasurer's
responsibilities are to:
-
record minutes,
-
maintain the
rules document,
-
keep a history
of email,
-
track finances
and interact with the GPC and SPEC Board in that regard.
-
Meetings
-
SPEC/GPC project
groups have three types of meetings (not including ad-hoc working-group
meetings)
-
Regular quarterly
face-to-face meetings
-
Special face-to-face
meetings for the full membership
-
Conference-call
meetings
-
Meetings which
qualify for attendance are limited to:
-
face-to-face
meetings scheduled at least one month in advance and
-
conference
calls scheduled at least two weeks in advance and which are
explicitly indicated as qualified at least two weeks in advance.
-
Voting
-
A quorum is defined
as the presence at a qualified meeting of at least 66% of the
set of members who hold voting rights. If too few voting members
are present for a quorum, voting cannot take place.
-
The electorate
is defined as the set of members who hold voting rights and who
are present at the time of a vote, provided that a quorum is satisfied.
-
Membership
Dues and Billing
-
Dues are assessed
on the basis of membership of SPEC/GPC's project groups.
-
Dues for the
SPEC/GPC project groups will be set annually by the SPEC Board
of Directors with input from the SPEC/GPC. Once set, the dues
amount will be recorded in the SPEC minutes and communicated to
the SPEC/GPC by the SPEC office.
-
Dues payment,
purchase order or letter of intent to pay for a given calendar
year must be received at the SPEC office by March 1st of that
year. Alternatively, a letter of intent to join the respective
project group must be received by the SPEC office by March 1st
of that year with a subsequent dues payment by May 1st of that
year. Failure to meet these deadlines will result in loss of membership
and voting rights. Membership will be reinstated when full payment
is received at the SPEC office. Voting rights will be reinstated
according to the attendance rules in section II.1.g and II.1.h.
-
Non-Member
Publication
-
The SPEC/GPC
project groups will accept submissions from non-members for review
and publication on the SPEC public website.
-
Non-member submissions
must follow the same rules and procedures as member submissions.
-
Non-members are
not eligible to participate in reviewing results.
-
Non-members will
be charged for their submissions according to an approved fee
structure. Any change in hardware or software constitutes a new
configuration.
-
On an annual
basis the SPEC/GPC will establish the pricing and periods for
non-member publication. These will be recorded in the SPEC/GPC
minutes and published on the GPC web-site.
-
A configuration
will be published on-line for six months, unless the submitter
notifies the publisher that it should be removed.
-
After six months,
the configuration will be removed automatically, unless the submitter
notifies the publisher that it should remain on-line.
-
There are no
additional non-member fees for extending on-line publication beyond
six months.
-
Each SPEC/GPC
project group may remove published results from its web pages
due to benchmark revision. In this case, the submitter will be
given notice by the project group and may, at no charge, resubmit
the identical configuration for the revised benchmark.
-
Benchmarks
-
Each project group
shall document all benchmark-related rules in its respective project
group rules document.
-
Submission
and Review Rules
-
Submission
Preparation Rules
-
The rules for
the submission and review cycle to be used are those approved
by the respective project group's committee prior to the submission
deadline. The approved rules must be posted to the respective
project group's web-site by the first publication date for the
benchmark.
-
Version compliance:
The benchmark and (where applicable) application versions to be
used are those approved by the respective project group's committee
prior to the submission deadline. The approved benchmark (and
application) versions must be posted to the respective project
group's web-site by the first publication date for the benchmark.
-
All benchmark
sources for a submission must be the same as that approved by
the respective project group's committee prior to the submission
deadline. The approved benchmark sources must be posted to the
respective project group's web-site by the first publication date
for the benchmark.
-
Submission
Content Rules
-
The information
supplied must reflect the system as tested.
-
Configuration
description: All fields in a submission's results file must be
supplied, unless the field names are marked "opt.",
indicating an optional field.
-
Submitters must
specify a date for 'General Availability' that is accurate for
the entire system - hardware, software, O/S, drivers, etc.
-
The "Comments" area
of the results page must describe how the system may be acquired.
-
Date fields must
always contain a valid date. "Now" is not valid in a
date field.
-
Price includes
system and monitor as tested.
-
Price may be
submitted with an alterate currency from the US dollar. The submission
will be sorted separately on the summary pages for Price and Price/Performance.
-
The submitter
is required to declare sufficient information to reproduce the
performance claimed. This includes but is not limited to:
-
non-default
environment variables,
-
non-default
registry variables,
-
hints,
-
compiler name
and version,
-
compiler command
line,
-
changes to
the standard makefiles.
-
Any information
required to be reported such as non-default environment variables,
registry variables or hints, that does not have a predefined field
must be documented in the "Comments" area of the results
page.
-
Valid submissions
must include screen captures if required by the benchmark.
-
Results previously
published for a system can be resubmitted. Resubmissions do not
require the inclusion of screen capture images.
-
Previously published
results being re-submitted can only have price changes.
-
Each member company
must ensure that the upload file contains data for all the new
configurations and existing published configurations they wish
to continue publishing.
-
Standardized
CPU cache nomenclature is as follows:
-
(D+I) designates
a unified instruction and data cache
-
(D/I) designates
separate instruction and data caches
-
A number followed
by KB or MB can be used to describe the size of the cache.
-
Caches dedicated
to a processor are listed as per processor cache size.
-
Caches shared
by multiple processors are listed by total size
-
Each component
of the submitted configuration (including the graphics driver)
shall be:
-
uniquely identified,
-
available to
members of the respective project group, upon demand, by the
submission deadline and for the duration of the review process,
-
verifiably
available to the public by the publication date, with continued
availability at least for the life of the submission, with sufficient
information in the comment field to enable users to directly
obtain this component.
-
Price must be
valid for two submission periods from date of publication. Quantity
1 pricing must be used.
-
Subsequent to
publication, any change to or replacement of elements for a submitted
configuration must not result in more than a 5% performance degradation
in the submitted benchmark results. Upon demonstration of such
a degradation, the submitted results for this configuration will
be removed from the SPEC public website.
-
On or before
the date of publication, the submitted configuration shall be
available for purchase by the public, for the specified price
or less, with a firm delivery date of 60 days or less. Submissions
will be categorized as either “Single Supplier” or “Parts
Built”, where “Single Supplier” is defined as
a configuration where all hardware and drivers are sold and supported
by a single supplier. “Supported” is defined as providing
hardware, drivers and associated technical support, and that the
drivers are available from the system supplier. “Parts Built” is
defined as a configuration built and supported by multiple suppliers.
-
“Parts
built” system pricing must include enough detail to reproduce
all aspects of the submission, including performance and price,
and include all hardware and O/S costs necessary to run benchmark.
-
Submission
Process Rules
-
Each benchmark
is considered a separate submission.
-
Submissions of
each benchmark's results (e.g. Maya6.5™, Solidworks 2005™,
SPECviewperf, etc.) must be in separate tar/zip files.
-
A submitter of
benchmark results must upload his or her submission to the proper
server location by the submission deadline date and time. The
submitter must not create any new directories on the server when
uploading the submission.
-
The submitter
must notify SPEC Office after a submission is uploaded to the
server prior to the submission deadline with contact information
for questions about the submission.
-
The submitter
must contact the SPEC office if they have attempted to upload
their submission and were not successful.
-
The SPEC office
will not disclose who has submitted results until the submission
deadline has passed.
-
Submissions will
not be accepted after the submission deadline.
-
The upload directory
will be set to write-only until the submission deadline has passed.
Then it is set to read-write (not modify) after the submission
deadline.
-
If a submitter
is notified that their submission format is incorrect, they must
re-send their submission in proper format within 3 business days
of notification.
-
Review
Period Rules
-
SPEC/GPC project
group members shall keep all submitted results confidential to
the respective project group until those results appear on the
public SPEC web site. The exception to this rule is that members
are free to make their own submitted results public at any time.
-
SPEC Office assigns
reviewers to submitters.
-
Members who wish
not to review the submission of other specific members due to
conflict of interest must submit that list to the SPEC office
prior to the submission deadline. The SPEC office will hold the
list in confidence from other members.
-
The various SPECapc
and SPECopc pools of eligible reviewers will be independent of
each other. The SPEC office will send the list of contact information
for the submissions under review.
-
All members will
have access to all benchmark submissions once the review period
begins.
-
The review period
shall be 5 calendar days.
-
Submissions cannot
be withdrawn during the review period without cause and without
prior approval of the primary reviewer. A submitter who is granted
permission to withdraw a submission must inform the committee
by email of the reason for withdrawal.
-
If a primary
reviewer has a question with a submission they must pose the question
to the submitter first. The primary reviewer may also pose questions
to the respective project group's officers or SPEC/GPC Chair for
clarification of rules if needed.
-
Any reviewer
who has one or more questions relating to a submission must:
-
Pose the question(s)
to the submitter and cc the primary reviewer, OR
-
Pose the question(s)
to the primary reviewer. The primary reviewer must then pose
the question(s) to the submitter, OR
-
Pose the question(s)
to an officer of the respective project group. The officer must
then pose the question(s) to the submitter and cc the primary
reviewer
-
With permission
of the primary reviewer, as communicated through the respective
project group's email alias, the submitter can request that their
submission be rejected on stated technical grounds.
-
With permission
of the primary reviewer, as communicated through the respective
project group's email alias, a submitter may resubmit a submission
to resolve issues found during the review process. The submitter
must notify the respective project group's mailing list with the
date and version of the resubmitted file(s).
-
The submitter
must provide the primary reviewer access to the system under test
at the submitter's facilities if requested by the reviewer during
the review period. The reviewer must state prior to the visit
what part of the submission is going to be verified. Travel expenses
are the responsibility of the reviewer.
-
Previously published
results being re-submitted can only be reviewed for consistency
with the previous submission, and price changes.
-
If the reviewer
disputes the stated pricing, the submitter must provide documentation
that the system can be purchased for the price quoted.
-
By the end of
the review period, the primary reviewer of a submission must designate
the status of the submission one of: “accepted without comment”, "accepted
with comment", “pending with comment”, or “rejected
with comment”. The submitter may appeal a rejection as described
in "Review Appeal Rules" below.
-
Any comments
for rejection of a submission received after the end of the review
period will not delay publication of the submission.
-
A submission
designated “pending with comment” will not
go public and will remain pending until
the submitter addresses all comments. Once
the comments are addressed the web master
will post to the public site. Any member
who feels comments are not satisfactorily
addressed may challenge the submission according
to Section IV.6 for challenging accepted
results.
-
Review
Appeal Rules
-
The appeal period
shall have the same duration as one submission cycle, and shall
immediately follow the review period.
-
Any submitter
of a rejected submission can make their case to the respective
project group's email alias during the appeal period.
-
At the end of
the appeal period, if there is no resolution,
the project group Chair shall call a vote
to accept or reject the submission.
-
The project group
electorate votes on acceptance or rejection
of an appealed submission. A simple majority
is required to approve or reject the appeal.
In case of a tie the submission is rejected.
-
Challenging
Accepted Results
-
Any member may
challenge accepted results at any time. This includes:
-
archived results,
-
currently published
results, and
-
resubmitted
results not subject to the regular submission review process.
-
The burden of
proof that the result should be modified is on the member who
is challenging the result.
-
The challenge
must be ratified by a majority vote of the project group's electorate.
-
The project group
Chair will call a special review cycle for a resubmission in the
event that there is a ratified challenge to currently published
results.
-
A ratified challenge
to archived results can only result in annotation, not removal
or modification. The annotation will be determined by the majority
of the electorate. It is the responsibility of the challenger
to verify that the results have been annotated correctly on the
public website within two working days from the ratification of
the challenge.
-
Publication
Rules
-
Official
Publication
-
Benchmark results
for publication by the SPECopc or the SPECapc must adhere to Articles
concerning "Overview", "Benchmark Run Rules" and "Submission
and Review Rules" as presented in this document AND the respective
project group's rules document.
-
Unofficial
Publication
-
Benchmark results
for publication elsewhere (e.g. industry journals, vendor web
sites, analyst reports) must adhere to Articles concerning "Overview" and "Benchmark
Run Rules" as presented in this document AND the respective
project group's rules document.
-
The respective
project group or any member thereof reserve the right to request
and receive evidence that the published results have been achieved
in accordance with the rules and that published information is
accurate.
-
SPECopc metrics
may be estimated. Metrics shall not be estimated for configurations
that are capable of running the benchmark. All estimated metrics
must be clearly identified as estimated. Licensees are encouraged
to publish actual SPECopc metrics as soon as possible. Proper trademark
usage for estimated results would be in the following forms:
-
SPECviewperf
Awadvs-04 estimated score of 30 fps
-
SPECviewperf |
Awadvs-04 |
30 |
est. |
SPECviewperf |
Light-04 |
122 |
est. |
Adoption
V1.00 adopted on 01/25/2006
v1.01 updated on 02/09/2006 to align wording with SPEC policy
|
|