Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Big Operating System Benchmark Comparison

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by deanjo View Post
    Well if we are going to add more linux distro's then we might as well put in the current Milestone release of openSUSE 11.2, Fedora, Mandriva, PCLinuxOS, Sabayon, and Slackware. Of course we need all these done in 32-bit and 64-bit as well.
    uuuhhh.. realy? come one we do not need 32bit tests!

    only 64bit! 32bit is an lameduck!

    and do we realy need all of the linux distris ?= ?= = = = =?? ?

    in my point of view in this test only 1 linux distri is better,

    he can make another test to test only linux distris...

    Comment


    • #17
      FreeBSD and PC-BSD doesn't make any sense. PC-BSD is just plain FreeBSD with some userfriendliness added (another installer, GUI by default). Performance should be identical as long as you don't choose a PC-BSD release with an older FreeBSD base.
      Better add OpenBSD instead.

      A source release-based Linux distro like Gentoo would be nice.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
        uuuhhh.. realy? come one we do not need 32bit tests!

        only 64bit! 32bit is an lameduck!
        Most netbooks/net tops are 32-bit only, so yes there is still a need for it. Especially when a majority of linux users still use 32-bit.
        and do we realy need all of the linux distris ?= ?= = = = =?? ?

        in my point of view in this test only 1 linux distri is better,

        he can make another test to test only linux distris...
        Sure he can, he can also only test 1 version of BSD as well.

        Comment


        • #19
          Well, benchmark shoot-outs alone are (no offence to your previous hard work) getting a little dull and repetitive. Of more interest is probably the question: How well do the differing OS's take advantage of the hardware available?

          The key questions for me would be:
          1. How does the jump in performance of OS A on a hard drive vs. an SSD compare to the jump for OS's B, C, D, etc. for the same?
            Recommended settings from the provider (i.e. noatime) would be applied
            This would make sense in the disk tests.
          2. How does the jump in performance of OS A on 32 vs. 64 bit and single vs. dual vs. quad core compare to the jump for OS's B, C, D, etc. for the same?
            Noting disadvantages such as no flash, broken/unavailable gfx drivers, etc.
            This would make sense in CPU and multi-threading heavy tests.
          3. How well does OS A work with Intel/AMD/NVidia compared to OS's B, C, D, etc where appropriate?
            A server board with Intel could be used, then add-in AMD/NVidia cards.
            Possibly open-source and proprietary drivers could be assesed.
            This would make sense in graphics heavy tests.

          As to actual OS's pick one from each:
          1. Linux Desktop/User friendly (probably Ubuntu Desktop)
          2. Linux Server/Hardcore (Ubuntu Server, RHES, Arch, i.e. lean)
          3. Mac OS X
          4. Solaris or OpenSolaris (any significant difference?)
          5. Net/Free/PC-BSD (perhaps more than one of them)
          6. <dream-mode>Windows 7</dream-mode>
          7. Possible others?...
          I would suggest that only the latest available supported releases are eligible. No alphas, betas or rc's.

          In the end this all might be a touch futile. Even if there were better figures in one of the others, personally I'd be unlikely to switch OS based on benchmarks. As an end-user it's more about the utility, comfort and previous experience of an OS than about a bit of performance here and there.

          As a developer (or in my case, a geek) it is interesting to highlight and spot patterns of deficiencies in comparison to peers.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by poofyyoda View Post
            Please don't use the shitty intel graphics which would skew results in favour of OS X again.
            Waiting on someone to send me some new Apple hardware then...
            Michael Larabel
            http://www.michaellarabel.com/

            Comment


            • #21
              gentoo is probably too much trouble to install, but would be nice to know if it's actually faster if well-maintained.

              Comment


              • #22
                Here's some of the new test profiles already added in Git, which will appear in Phoronix Test Suite 2.2 Alpha 1 for the testing.

                - pts: Add stream test profile for Stream memory benchmark
                - pts: Add tachyon test profile for Tachyon Parallel Ray-Tracing benchmark
                - pts: Add python-environment base test profile for placing external dependency on python and reporting Python version to test notes
                - pts: Add pybench test profile for Python's PyBench
                - pts: Add tscp test profile for the chess benchmark
                - pts: Add chess test suite for test profiles that use chess AI
                - pts: Add john-the-ripper test profile for John The Ripper password cracker benchmark
                Michael Larabel
                http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                Comment


                • #23
                  Development cycles

                  I think you should prepare all you need and wait until the next development cycles of Ubuntu and Fedora are final - but thats only my opinion.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                    Most netbooks/net tops are 32-bit only, so yes there is still a need for it. Especially when a majority of linux users still use 32-bit.
                    32bit is death... only retarded intel guys use atom32bitonly

                    and intel know that cpus witout 64 are death they only want earn some extra money witout deliver good produkts.

                    on linux 64bit is much faster becourse of the sse2 as a minimum of supportet extansion.

                    64bit linux win 80-90% of all tests!

                    everyone how buy an 32bit cpu today for running linux is mental retarded!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I have always wondered if the 'RT' kernel in a music distro had other benefits. Could UbuntuStudio 9.10 be added to the list? Maybe 64 Studio 3.0?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                        thats a good Point!

                        use an AMD VGA cart or nvidia but please not intel!
                        I dont think amd is even a good option. Nvidia works well on all platforms and the drivers are shared so that would be the logical decision.

                        I would just like to see a fair setup with equal hardware. All must be run in 64 bit mode. All must use the same filesystems if possible or the OS specific ones. eg. EXT4 on linux regardless if EXT3 is default. If Mac is compiled with certain SSE instructions then so should the other kernels.

                        save your time and just do freebsd, as they say, they are right. Save your time, ubuntu is a must because of its large user base and maybe fedora to contrast it. If the arch people didn't get it already from the arch benchmark, the distribution itself has little to do with the speed, more so to do with filesystem or kernel. Its a time sink. Solaris is a must but i think the results can already be expected.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                          32bit is death... only retarded intel guys use atom32bitonly

                          and intel know that cpus witout 64 are death they only want earn some extra money witout deliver good produkts.

                          on linux 64bit is much faster becourse of the sse2 as a minimum of supportet extansion.

                          64bit linux win 80-90% of all tests!

                          everyone how buy an 32bit cpu today for running linux is mental retarded!
                          actually intel knows that they can save on manufacturing costs and use less electricity by keeping the atom 32bit - which for its intended platform is very important.

                          as for the sse2 thing - thats a horrible arguement as the attom supports sse2/3/4.

                          for some things portability and battery life are more important the extreme processing power - and sometimes people only need a simple internet or multimedia machine and don't want to spend alot. for both of those, the atom is a great product.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                            64bit linux win 80-90% of all tests!
                            Sources missing.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                              everyone how buy an 32bit cpu today for running linux is mental retarded!
                              I guess that would mean ~70% of linux users are retarded then as that's still about the percentage of linux users using 32-bit. One of the strengths of linux is NOT having to buy new hardware to keep current with the OS. Linux is just as much as running on legacy systems as it is running on current hardware.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                I would really like to see Haiku OS thrown into this mix, though I am not sure it will run PTS.

                                As far as Linux distros go I would like to see Fedora and also Arch Linux thrown in (I enjoyed the Ubuntu vs Arch article today).

                                Another interesting thing to see compared would have to be the Enterprise distributions. SLES and RHEL - if these cannot be sourced (you can get SLES for free with 6 months of updates I think) then you put CentOS in there to give an idea of how an "Enterprise Linux" stacks up against cutting edge community distros.

                                It would be cool to see a Microsoft OS comparison too if the policy permits.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X