Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The New Linux Hardware, Software Playground

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The New Linux Hardware, Software Playground

    Phoronix: The New Linux Hardware, Software Playground

    Here's some new features and other upcoming work that may excite Linux enthusiasts in the Phoronix software/hardware playground...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTAwNTM

  • #2
    Nice job, I'm impressed.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by phoronix View Post
      Phoronix: The New Linux Hardware, Software Playground

      Here's some new features and other upcoming work that may excite Linux enthusiasts in the Phoronix software/hardware playground...

      http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTAwNTM
      Will one of the improvements be implementing whatever methods used by CPU-Z and GPU-Z to detect the hardware more accurately as is done by every Windows review site?

      Comment


      • #4
        Missing Features

        Maybe I'm not the expected audience, but I find fundamental things missing or at least I can't find them. The most obvious feature to me is being able to do comparisons between results. If some guy with an i7 990x ran the apache benchmark and another guy ran the same benchmark on his atom machine why can't I just give the website two IDs or result names and get the results compared. All the data is there but there is no way to mine the data. If I can't run a simplified query a filter UI would be helpful instead. Maybe this is intentional so we rely on you to think of everything we'd want to search for. Think of newegg and searching for products and comparing them. Seems to fit right into your ideas as well.

        Also why did I install python-fpdf then there is no option from the command line to save the results as PDF? Also uploading results just fails with some generic error message like "upload failed".

        You have some great software and a great website but then the polish or user friendliness seems to be missing. Last time I checked the bug where you need to login to the forum first and return to the home page each time to get phoronix premium working is still there.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Kivada View Post
          Will one of the improvements be implementing whatever methods used by CPU-Z and GPU-Z to detect the hardware more accurately as is done by every Windows review site?
          PTS does support some of them for better RAM detection, etc. It's done automatically, but it requires running PTS as root. Not many of the Linux users normally run their applications as root.
          Michael Larabel
          http://www.michaellarabel.com/

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by zeroepoch View Post
            Maybe I'm not the expected audience, but I find fundamental things missing or at least I can't find them. The most obvious feature to me is being able to do comparisons between results. If some guy with an i7 990x ran the apache benchmark and another guy ran the same benchmark on his atom machine why can't I just give the website two IDs or result names and get the results compared. All the data is there but there is no way to mine the data. If I can't run a simplified query a filter UI would be helpful instead. Maybe this is intentional so we rely on you to think of everything we'd want to search for. Think of newegg and searching for products and comparing them. Seems to fit right into your ideas as well.
            It works by either inputting the same OpenBenchmarking.org ID when anyone else wants to compare their system to yours. Or if on the left column of OpenBenchmarking.org it should detect all 'matching' results in the Compare Results menu and there's also a search item there. Or the manual way is to just append the extra OpenBenchmarking.org IDs your talking about delimited by a comma to the URL string of /results/

            Originally posted by zeroepoch View Post
            Also why did I install python-fpdf then there is no option from the command line to save the results as PDF?
            It should say it right in the documentation... But it's the result-file-to-pdf option generates the PDF.

            Originally posted by zeroepoch View Post
            You have some great software and a great website but then the polish or user friendliness seems to be missing. Last time I checked the bug where you need to login to the forum first and return to the home page each time to get phoronix premium working is still there.
            Yes there's always room to make it more user-friendly. Unfortunately as I am basically the only one writing all of the content on Phoronix, and all of the code behind the Phoronix Test Suite and Openbenchmarking.org, among other work, I don't have much time for polishing.
            Michael Larabel
            http://www.michaellarabel.com/

            Comment


            • #7
              would be cool if we could see some sort of integration or data exchange with the ubuntu friendly programme in the future.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by madjr View Post
                would be cool if we could see some sort of integration or data exchange with the ubuntu friendly programme in the future.
                They don't seem to be interested in collaboration. I've offered multiple times with Canonical/Ubuntu to collaborate on various test related matters, and they just tend to seem to be not interested and/or NIH.
                Michael Larabel
                http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                Comment


                • #9
                  That's some mighty good plans. I hope there'll be some caching, so not every page load at openbenchmarking causes a hit to various bugzillas, MLs, and git repos?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by curaga View Post
                    I hope there'll be some caching, so not every page load at openbenchmarking causes a hit to various bugzillas, MLs, and git repos?
                    Of course. Otherwise it would be much too slow for users and too much server load. There's already various caching mechanisms in place seeing as already the internally collected OB result data is in excess of a GB that's routinely scanned.
                    Michael Larabel
                    http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Michael View Post
                      They don't seem to be interested in collaboration. I've offered multiple times with Canonical/Ubuntu to collaborate on various test related matters, and they just tend to seem to be not interested and/or NIH.
                      yes, this is why i mentioned the "future", because they tend to never drift off their specifications in the starting phases or for a while...

                      only thing that seems to draw their attention are bug reports, i think some have to be filed so they can start opening up in time...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Also some interesting community survey results that mention quite a few problems with the bureaucracy and stuff like that.

                        http://www.jonobacon.org/2011/10/24/...urvey-results/

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Michael View Post
                          It works by either inputting the same OpenBenchmarking.org ID when anyone else wants to compare their system to yours. Or if on the left column of OpenBenchmarking.org it should detect all 'matching' results in the Compare Results menu and there's also a search item there. Or the manual way is to just append the extra OpenBenchmarking.org IDs your talking about delimited by a comma to the URL string of /results/
                          The only option I found previously was rerunning the benchmarks and giving pts the ID of the other run. I still don't see the compare results menu anywhere. Some how I missed the red "add to comparison" bar but it doesn't persist across page loads. The comma trick is useful for power users but not obvious. What you are saying about the compare results menu is what I would expect but I can't find it.

                          Originally posted by Michael View Post
                          It should say it right in the documentation... But it's the result-file-to-pdf option generates the PDF.
                          I see that option now after greping the usage output. I was looking for it under "RESULT MANAGEMENT" next to result-file-to-csv.

                          The little quirks can be annoying but quick direct responses from you is why I keep coming back. Makes me feel more connected to the site.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            So any chance of tables like these?
                            http://www.notebookcheck.net/Compute...s.13849.0.html

                            http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-...ist.844.0.html

                            http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Rad...M.57308.0.html

                            They do a very good job of packaging the data for hundreds of models of CPU and GPU in a quickly human scanable way.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by zeroepoch View Post
                              I see that option now after greping the usage output. I was looking for it under "RESULT MANAGEMENT" next to result-file-to-csv.
                              It should have been under that section, but I see I didn't ever add it there. However, it will be with result management in PTS 3.6.
                              Michael Larabel
                              http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X