Call for tenders' details
Status
Submission date
19/05/2014
Answer date
22/05/2014
Language
Status
Answered
Question details
Subject
Annex 4 - Minimum technical requirements / Performance requirements & Security features
Question
We noticed that the minimum PCMark 7 benchmark for the Reference PC configuration has been fixed at 2,700 and 5,500 respectively when enhanced with the "Power PC enhancement" bundle. The majority of the most recent processors (not all of them) include support for the Advanced Encryption Standard Instruction Set (AES*). We noticed that within the security features you are asking for TPM 1.2, and therefore we assume that encryption will be implemented and represents a key security feature within this tender framework. The main effect of AES instruction set is to improve the speed of applications performing encryption and decryption using hardware. A processor without the AES instruction set within an encrypted environment will result in being 15% slower in performing common office application tasks. We would therefore ask to reduce the minimum PCMark 7 score for all the offers based on processors supporting the AES instruction set for the Reference PC configuration at 2,300 and 4,600 respectively when enhanced with the "Power PC enhancement" bundle since the inclusion of the AES NI instruction set more than compensates for the lower benchmark score using PCMark 7 in a highly sensitive environment that requires stringent security measures as within the European Commission.
Answer
22/05/2014
The minimum requirement for the TPM (i.e. TPM 1.2 or later) has been set so that we may be able to use its capabilities. On the other hand a processor's support for the AES instruction set is not a prerequisite for applications using encryption, but instead a feature which would potentially improve the related performance. As such, although tenderers may propose CPUs supporting the AES instruction set, we do not set a minimum requirement for the processor to support it. Regarding the benchmark minimum results, we have set them to the values mentioned in Annex 4, having already taken into consideration the performance of our current models. Thus we do not accept your proposal for lowering the minimum benchmark results.