Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why does Phoronix use Ubuntu for Benchmarking ?

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

  • #16
    well, lets see - reports of kde crashes in kubuntu - and seldomly somewhere else. KDE's localization is pretty much complete (and it is complete for languages like german or french), but not in kubuntu - because they 'destroy' the complete kde localization and replace it with the incomplete ubunutu localization.

    Comment


    • #17
      Linuxmint's KDE (gloria) was very impresive and one of the best kde implementations I have tried to date. Very usable and I know they fixed a lot of the Kubuntu issues along the way. Shame no 64 bit version.

      Comment


      • #18
        Well, I'm fan of gentoo and while I'musing for the last 5 years the same installation, it's always modern and fast, but such a distro is not the best choice for phoronix tests. While it could be faster than Ubuntu, OpenSUSE etc it needs work to install so is not comfortable when you have a piece of new hardware and want to setup, run and test an OS in a few minutes. So a binary based pre-configured distro is the best choice. So since we have to choose between one million dists the best option is the most popular one and that's Ubuntu.

        Comment


        • #19
          but ubuntu does not use the most popular desktop and their kernel is heavily patched. Something closer to mainline would be better, because the results could pe transfered for easily.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by energyman View Post
            but ubuntu does not use the most popular desktop and their kernel is heavily patched. Something closer to mainline would be better, because the results could pe transfered for easily.
            Well, nothing is perfect, Ubuntu uses one of the two most popular desktop environments but to use KDE or Gnome is not critical for benchmarking. Also, since Ubuntu has a lot of flavours like Kubuntu and Xubuntu you can be pretty sure that the results you see in phoronix.com will be the same between them.
            Also, for the heavily patched kernel, well this is more common between the distros than the ice in the arctic and there is a reason for that. OpenSUSE does the same and Mandriva and Fedora etc... even gentoo's default kernel is patched. Also, don't forget that PTS compiles the benchmark apps by itself rather than using the distro's defaults.
            The most important thing someone who runs benchmarks should keep in mind is the time and easy of install and setup of the OS he uses.

            Comment


            • #21
              except that the DE has an influence. I tried it a few years ago. Everything based qt (kde, integrity) was a little bit faster than everything based gtk (gnome, xfce)

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by energyman View Post
                except that the DE has an influence. I tried it a few years ago. Everything based qt (kde, integrity) was a little bit faster than everything based gtk (gnome, xfce)
                But that's a personal opinion, you can't present results based on this, personally I've experienced quite the opposite, so I use Gnome in my desktop machine and XFCE for laptops

                Comment


                • #23
                  I don't have the numbers anymore, but:
                  glxgears was faster
                  ut2003 was faster
                  vegastrike was faster

                  with kde or integrity.

                  Not much, we are talking 2-3fps. But that in all situations.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by energyman View Post
                    I don't have the numbers anymore, but:
                    glxgears was faster
                    ut2003 was faster
                    vegastrike was faster

                    with kde or integrity.

                    Not much, we are talking 2-3fps. But that in all situations.
                    Maybe something in your Gnome installation was using CPU. Pulseaudio for example. For me both KDE and Gnome are the sdame in speed but Gnome uses lower RAM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      back then pulseaudio didn't even exist. And I will never use a sounddaemon. I hate them so much.

                      about memory:
                      http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/memory/de...benchmark.html

                      I really don't think that gnome has changed for the better - because a complete rewrite would be necessary.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by energyman View Post
                        back then pulseaudio didn't even exist. And I will never use a sounddaemon. I hate them so much.

                        about memory:
                        http://ktown.kde.org/~seli/memory/de...benchmark.html

                        I really don't think that gnome has changed for the better - because a complete rewrite would be necessary.
                        All these tests are very subjective. the plain desktop means nothing. For example was nautilus compiled with tracker or beagle support? Did gnome-panel used eds etc. Under my gentoo I can for example build a Gnome system which can use 40% lesser RAM or 80% more than the current one I use. The same for KDE. The matter is for the things I need my system to support, Gnome is a bit lighter. But as I said before that's just a personal experience and should stay like that when I have to present tests in the public. The DE should be relevant just when we benchmark desktop environments. When we run a general benchmark in Ubuntu and Mandriva, the matter is the performance with its default enviroments and not when we change Gnome to KDE in Ubuntu and KDE to Gnome in Mandriva.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          look at the date. 2006. Was anybody using tracker or beagle back then? did pulseaudio even exist?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by energyman View Post
                            look at the date. 2006. Was anybody using tracker or beagle back then? did pulseaudio even exist?
                            I mentioned some examples, I'm bored to check what options had Gnome and KDE back then. There are thousands of things in Linux that can make your desktop environments fly or crawl, from the compiler's flags to support of bluetooth and multimedia. In general you can make even XFCE to perform "heavier" than Vista (well, overexaggeration ofcourse, but you get the picture )
                            Come on, you're a gentoo user, you know that very well
                            Last edited by Apopas; 08-02-2009, 03:27 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Phoronix probably uses Ubuntu for hardware benchmarking for a very good reason - they had to choose one. If they started to choose more, Phoronix might lose focus.

                              I am happy as I hope they will also stick with it. That way one can make comparisons over time. No, I have never run Ubuntu myself.

                              And, if they compare an alpha version with a stable? Well, as long as it is clearly stated in the article, I see no bad in that.

                              .

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Many servers run at runlevel 3 so the desktop does not even matter. I want to see benchmarks of server performance: nfs, openldap, postgresql, samba.

                                I want benchmarks with tweaked configurations. Anyone who cares about performance is going to tweak, so benchmarks with default parameters are not very interesting.

                                I would like to see benchmarks for routing. I want to use el-cheapo hardware for routing and I want to know which is the best kernel to use. I want to see IPv4 performance versus IPv6 performance.

                                I want to see benchmarks for network cards. I want to know which cards will slurp up a saturated gigabit network without dropping packets.

                                I would like to see benchmarks for virtualization products. Centos 5 in VMware versus Centos 5 in qemu, for example.

                                I want to see benchmarks for supported products. I don't care about gentoo or opensolaris or opensuse because they do not have professional support. In my business the only two distributions that matter are RedHat and SuSE. This is not my choice but it is reality.

                                The desktop is more than fast enough for me already. I don't care if a text box draws 1.4% faster on one distribution than another.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X