One of the purposes of HPC benchmarks is to identify limitations and bottlenecks in hardware. This functionality is particularly influential when assessing performance on emerging tasks, the nature and requirements of which may not yet be fully understood. In this setting, a proper benchmark can steer the design of next generation hardware by properly identifying said requirements, and quicken the deployment of novel solutions. With the increasing popularity of deep learning workloads, benchmarks for this family of tasks have been gaining popularity. Particularly for image based tasks, which rely on the most well established family of deep learning models: Convolutional Neural Networks. Significantly, most benchmarks for CNN use low-resolution and fixed-shape (LR&FS) images. While this sort of inputs have been very successful for certain purposes, they are insufficient for some domains of special interest (e.g., medical image diagnosis or autonomous driving) where one requires higher resolutions and variable-shape (HR&VS) images to avoid loss of information and deformation. As of today, it is still unclear how does image resolution and shape variability affect the nature of the problem from a computational perspective. In this paper we assess the differences between training with LR&FS and HR&VS, as means to justify the importance of building benchmarks specific for the latter. Our results on three different HPC clusters show significant variations in time, resources and memory management, highlighting the differences between LR&FS and HR&VS image deep learning.
