Describe the load that the test should represent
| Dimension | What to specify |
|---|---|
| Connections | Normal activity, peak simultaneous use and reconnect events. |
| Data | Instrument set, quote activity, retained records and expected growth. |
| Processing | Integrations, history requests, reporting and scheduled work. |
| Timing | Which busy periods and jobs can overlap. |
Use measured production observations when available. For a new operation, label workload assumptions and agree them with the responsible technical parties before interpreting the test result.
Observe the application and the machine together
Track the user or operator workflow alongside CPU use, memory pressure, storage response and relevant network observations. Record application versions and the environment limits. A synthetic hardware benchmark does not demonstrate the outcome of a specific platform or integration workflow.
Include a sustained observation window and routine operational work. If performance changes during backup or reporting, investigate the competing workload before concluding that the entire platform needs a larger server. Repeat the same scenario after a proposed change.
Write a decision that can be reviewed later
Record the tested workload, observed bottlenecks, available margin and assumptions about growth. Separate a passed test from untested future demand. Define a review trigger based on an observable trend rather than a marketing account-capacity figure.
Use the MT5 requirements brief to connect the evaluation to a hosting proposal. If dedicated compute is being considered, include the hardware replacement and recovery boundary; application acceptance is incomplete without an operating plan for the chosen infrastructure.