Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora 20 Beta vs. Ubuntu 13.10 vs. Scientific Linux 6.4

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

  • Fedora 20 Beta vs. Ubuntu 13.10 vs. Scientific Linux 6.4

    Phoronix: Fedora 20 Beta vs. Ubuntu 13.10 vs. Scientific Linux 6.4

    Last week I shared results of Fedora 19 vs. Fedora 20 Beta Linux performance from an AMD Opteron system and those results were of much interest to many Phoronix readers, so to kick off a new week of Linux benchmarking are results from that system when adding in Ubuntu 13.10 and Scientific Linux 6.4 (RHEL-based) to this Linux OS comparison.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=19344

  • #2
    Ubuntu is more faster than Fedora. Ok

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by felipe View Post
      Ubuntu is more faster than Fedora. Ok
      Fedora gets a couple of wins past the first two pages.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by felipe View Post
        Ubuntu is more faster than Fedora. Ok
        Faster than the Fedora beta with debugging enabled, at least. We'll have to see if that's still the case for F20 final release.

        There are a few really anomalous results though. The GPUTest results where Ubuntu is about 2.5 times quicker than either Fedora version, and the Postmark test where both Fedora versions are about 4 times quicker than Ubuntu. Those are oddities, to say the least...

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by felipe View Post
          Ubuntu is more faster than Fedora. Ok
          Ubuntu won only in graphics benchmarks. With proprietary blob or different driver performance should be the same. Fedora won much more important tests. It's probably because Ubuntu is using NOOP as a disk scheduler and Fedora is using CFQ afaik.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
            Ubuntu won only in graphics benchmarks. With proprietary blob or different driver performance should be the same. Fedora won much more important tests. It's probably because Ubuntu is using NOOP as a disk scheduler and Fedora is using CFQ afaik.
            Where can I find more information about disk schedulers?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by duby229 View Post
              Where can I find more information about disk schedulers?
              I've checked kernel config in Ubuntu:

              /boot/config-3.11.0-13-generic, but it seems there's some easier way:

              cat /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler

              I have to stand corrected - Ubuntu is using deadline. Here's some info about schedulers:

              http://www.admon.org/a-comparison-of-io-schedulers/

              Comment


              • #8
                The matter is more simplified to my understanding.

                Ubuntu has been tackling the issues that would cause discomfort to the Valve Source Engine, and they've been tweaking the OS for gaming, which explains its superiority as a Gaming Platform.

                Remember Valve used Ubuntu to port several game titles to Linux on Ubuntu, and they reported dozens of errors on both Ubuntu and the Linux Kernel for improvements, where patches were issued and bugs were fixed.

                With that being said, I believe that explains the smoothness of its gamin experience, which most of the regular non-geeky users would like to have on their boxes.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I assume Ubuntu is using Unity and Fedora is using Gnome Shell? Does this contribute to the performance difference on the graphical side?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by CoderniX View Post
                    The matter is more simplified to my understanding.

                    Ubuntu has been tackling the issues that would cause discomfort to the Valve Source Engine, and they've been tweaking the OS for gaming, which explains its superiority as a Gaming Platform.

                    Remember Valve used Ubuntu to port several game titles to Linux on Ubuntu, and they reported dozens of errors on both Ubuntu and the Linux Kernel for improvements, where patches were issued and bugs were fixed.

                    With that being said, I believe that explains the smoothness of its gamin experience, which most of the regular non-geeky users would like to have on their boxes.
                    This is an idiot statement: improvements are done upstream not in ubuntu.
                    ## VGA ##
                    AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
                    Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by CoderniX View Post
                      The matter is more simplified to my understanding.

                      Ubuntu has been tackling the issues that would cause discomfort to the Valve Source Engine, and they've been tweaking the OS for gaming, which explains its superiority as a Gaming Platform.

                      Remember Valve used Ubuntu to port several game titles to Linux on Ubuntu, and they reported dozens of errors on both Ubuntu and the Linux Kernel for improvements, where patches were issued and bugs were fixed.

                      With that being said, I believe that explains the smoothness of its gamin experience, which most of the regular non-geeky users would like to have on their boxes.
                      You're either implying that Ubuntu did not push those fixes upstream, or you're plain wrong.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I don't like this kind of articles, just run the benchmark script and post the results. You have the hardware and are probably experienced with benchmark much more than us. Proper conclusions, or hints on why there are indeed these "oddities" on the GPU benchmarking, would be appreciated. Otherwise the readers have to work them out on their own (see, find the disk scheduler), or in the worst case these are good just to start flamewars without actual facts.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by r1348 View Post
                          You're either implying that Ubuntu did not push those fixes upstream, or you're plain wrong.
                          I beg to differ as I've been following Ubuntu's evolution since 2008, and been using it since then, except the few months ago, where I stopped using Linux as whole and replaced it with OSX waiting for Linux to get proper PRIME support, and for Ubuntu to either stick to X.org for sure or jump to a working stable MIR.

                          PRIME would've been working already, if some of the FOSS weren't too fussy about not allowing NVIDIA to use their Kernel Symbols for the DMA-BUF to make it work, and they explained that by wanting only GPLed code and only from contributors :/

                          I'd careless for what's been there, as I just want something that works for me owning 3 expensive PRIME laptops, which I used for work and feed the mouths depending on me to provide a meal for them, and I have no time for a philosophical debate, as if it's in my power, I'll just whatever custom Kernel NVIDIA would provide that uses their own custom Kernel Sybols. What a shame I had to acquire Macs.

                          Windows is a No for me and will remain the same. Mac is okay, though is expensive yet it provides the comfort of being on a *Nix familiar platform.

                          To be honest, I'm a pro-Ubuntu, as I've been around several distros from the old Slackware, Mandrake, Knoppix, RedHat, Zen, Xandros, Linspire, Gentoo, Arch, Mint, and others and never felt at ease like on Ubuntu, because I use it for work and not for studies or as a hobby.

                          I hate the guts out of Unity and I still do, and tried GnomeShell which made me even hate anything like that. KDE wasn't/isn't productive for me, and way slower. XFCE is fine but not that useful.

                          It happens that Unity is somehow showing it down my throat as it has a stable ecosystem, and it feels things are relevant to each other. And with all the hate pouring against Mir, I'd really wish to see Mir succeed, and I wish the good luck for Wayland, since it got big backers.

                          I hate the hell out of the CLA, just like I hate it for Digia's Qt, which is much loved by KDE developers, and it even makes me sick to see the double standards for Qt and for RedHat when they had it and it didn't receive all the hate like Canonical.

                          Mark can be a jerk, no doubt, but I'd say the same and be the same as he was if I was treated like he was by the whole community, while he has provided a real userbase for the Linux world, whether people recognize it or not. Ubuntu is Linux and will remain Linux and no one can exclude it from the Linux fold, just like no one can exclude OSX from the Unix fold, or Android from the Linux community.

                          I'm a realist, and I know when Mir gets stable, I'll be using Ubuntu one more time, because I'm not that crazy to invest in hardware that I won't use.

                          Oh, and I have no interest in running the NVIDIA or ATI open source drivers, that would have been the case when I was in university, not when I have to feed my dependents. Sorry, cannot be philosophical, unless Intel or so pays me to work on their open source stack. That's the bitter sweet reality for the fathers who have to feed their children.

                          Anyway, I wish everyone a good luck.

                          No wonder why most of the Software companies out there provide an Ubuntu package, be it Viber, Skype, Valve, LightWorks or you name it!

                          No time for proof-reading the whole thing, but you can get what I've just written.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X