Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu 7.04 to 8.10 Benchmarks: Is Ubuntu Getting Slower?

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

  • #76
    An idea on where the problem possibly lays. Some posters have reported no real differences on their T60's across Ubunutu versions, and some have posted speeds that don't correlate to Phoronix's on 8.04 8.10 on T60's. But all these T60's seem to be Merom Core 2 Duo's, not Yonah Core Duo's.

    I propose that the problem might lay in some Ubuntu's versions interaction with the Yonah Core Duo feature set, or possibly with chipsets, though I don't know if the motherboards are different, they very well could be the same.

    I do remember some kind of problem I saw a couple years ago, with I think Mandriva, on a Core Duo, which was not related to EIST, where both cores reported as up and working, but one core ran incredibly slow, this would effect non-multi-threaded tasks more than others, if they were running only on that core. No problems in this regard when I put Debian back on it instead.

    Comment


    • #77
      For those interested, the ThinkPad T60 we used in testing was a 2006 model, 2613-EJU.

      Fedora benchmarks will be out tomorrow and more to come next week.
      Michael Larabel
      http://www.michaellarabel.com/

      Comment


      • #78
        One thing that occurred to me is that possibly some thermal throttling was going on which is possible if the system was being stressed for a long period of time.

        Comment


        • #79
          You missed my point.

          Originally posted by Michael View Post
          Note that I ... didn't attempt to make any blanket claims, and I didn't start pointing any fingers around.
          Michael, thanks for the response, much appreciated. However, consider that when you ask if there is something wrong in a headline, that you are making a form of blanket claim and pointing fingers. The claiming and the pointing is implicit, but it's enough to confuse a whole lot of people who take headlines at face value. This technique is used for character assassination all the time in politics and entertainment journalism to discredit someone without having to back up any claims. In fact, it's being used quite a bit in the US presidential race right now. Perhaps it's just the political climate that's making me a bit more sensitive to truth and disclosure than normal.

          Anyway, thanks for a great site and for the work you're doing, and I hope I won't be complaining again any time soon.

          Comment


          • #80
            Is the Phoronix Test wrong ?

            Hello!

            to show the contrary to Phoronix results I did same testing on my own computer with different Ubuntus.

            Hardware:
            • CPU: AMD Athlon M XP 2500+ (Barton) @ 1920 MHz (Mainboard doesn't get the name correctly)
            • RAM: 2GB MDT DDR2-800
            • GPU: Asus N6600GT 128MB (Nvidia 6600GT)
            • MB: MSI K7N2-Delta
            • HDD: Samsung SpinPoint P120 SP2514N 250 GB

            Software:
            • Ubuntu 6.06, Ubuntu 7.10, Ubuntu 8.04, Ubuntu 8.10
            • all are standard installs and up-to-date (10-30-08), means for Intrepid it is final release
            • graphic card works on all systems with the latest nvidia-glx available in official restricted repository
            • extra packages are only build-essential and libgtk2.0-dev and dependencies and
            • phoronix-test-suite 1.2.2 (DEB) from Phoronix and
            • gtkperf 0.40 (DEB) from Sourceforge

            Sure, these are only few tests. I will do some more testing when I have the time do to it.

            Benchmarks:
            Because of the gtkperf TotalTime taking too long I installed the DEB from Sourceforge gtkperf 0.40:
            • gtkperf 0.40



            As you can see, the trend of the Phoronix results can not be affirmed. Some of them even show Ubuntu is getting faster!

            Greetz,
            Beleriand
            Last edited by Beleriand; 10-30-2008, 09:26 PM.

            Comment


            • #81
              Awesome.... NOT.

              I don't need a test to prove the difference between my first distro, Ubuntu 7.04, and my worst distro, Ubuntu 8.04. The difference is HUGE on my P4 2.66GHz machine with 256MB DDR1 400MHz ram and GMA 900 onboard graphics, where ubuntu 7.04 was the best thing ever.

              Comment


              • #82
                As you can see Hardy was really a bit slow in comparison to Gutsy. But you can see that Intrepid is faster than Hardy, which implies that Ubuntu is not getting slower all the time.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Beleriand View Post
                  Hello!

                  to show the contrary to Phoronix results I did same testing on my own computer with different Ubuntus.
                  Your tests only show, that your machine is slow for an 1.92 GHz processor. There is an MP3 encoding on a 1.99GHz Athlon, which is nearby twice as fast as yours. I know is not really comparable.

                  Originally posted by Beleriand View Post
                  Hello!
                  As you can see, the trend of the Phoronix results can not be affirmed. Some of them even show Ubuntu is getting faster!
                  I can see the same trends in your test. The "Bandwidth 0.13" test losses 25% speed. And audio encoding takes longer, on intrepid. The differences are not as big as in the phoronix test, but your machine is much slower. Your memory bandwidth is only 1300MB/s compared to 3300MB/s.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    I have found that ETQW performs worse since Ubuntu Hardy (Intrepid is the worst performer in Linux with this game) FPS stays very low (on Lenny I get more FPS but there are slowdowns), and Intrepid "included" nvidia driver (177.80) has graphical glitches that don't appear when installing the driver manually.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Beleriand View Post
                      As you can see Hardy was really a bit slow in comparison to Gutsy. But you can see that Intrepid is faster than Hardy, which implies that Ubuntu is not getting slower all the time.
                      The problem exists since gusty or 2.6.20 kernel. I don't have made any phoronix tests, but my system become slow with gusty. Intrepid is reaches an awful responsiveness. Try to copy a big file or to install some apps and working with gimp, firefox or even gedit. Using disc intensive application is an horror since gutsy.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by marakaid View Post
                        I have found that ETQW performs worse since Ubuntu Hardy (Intrepid is the worst performer in Linux with this game) FPS stays very low (on Lenny I get more FPS but there are slowdowns),
                        Have you some data? Is it like 80 -> 40 or 80 -> 70 ?

                        Originally posted by marakaid View Post
                        and Intrepid "included" nvidia driver (177.80) has graphical glitches that don't appear when installing the driver manually.
                        That's another thing. Intrepid is using the xorg 1.5 server. The driver should be nearby beta status. Perhaps there are some more fixes in the official driver?

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          I would be interested to see a benchmark comparison between Ubuntu and Debian. There is no question that Debian runs lighter and faster than Ubuntu. This would be the litmus test for just how bloated Ubuntu really is.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            I'm currently running the audio-enconding tests of the test suite on a Thinkpad R31 (P-3 1GHz, 512MB RAM) on Ubuntu 8.10 and the tests that are finished (LAME, OGG, FLAC) are only ~10% lower than the numbers Phoronix got for their T60.

                            The T60 has a Core2Duo with 1.87Ghz, it should be twice as fast as a P-3 with 1GHz. Remember the scores for the audio-tests are in seconds!

                            Code:
                                   R31         T60
                            LAME  133.07s    120.83s
                            OGG   84.40s     69.81s
                            FLAC  62.13s     56.19s
                            Does now someone believe that the numbers Phoronix got for its T60 and Ubuntu 8.10 can't be right?

                            P.S :

                            I will upload the complete results when the tests are finished and post the link here in the forum.

                            Edit :

                            The complete results can be found here :

                            http://global.phoronix-test-suite.co...14-14176-26881
                            Last edited by glasen; 10-31-2008, 09:34 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              I also have 2 more tests (see my post on page 8 for more).

                              computational
                              gtkperf TotalTime

                              As you might criticize, theres some difference in screen resolutions.
                              This should not affect the computational result but maybe the gtkperf a bit. I will proof later that its not a big issue.

                              Furthermore I re-emphasize that I believe that something went wrong with the Phoronix test on audio-encoding. I wait in suspense for results on ohter platforms.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                This is all just a trick to get us to use Phoronix's benchmarking tool and prove them wrong.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X