Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Surprising Power Consumption Of Ubuntu 11.04 vs. Windows 7

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

  • Surprising Power Consumption Of Ubuntu 11.04 vs. Windows 7

    Phoronix: Surprising Power Consumption Of Ubuntu 11.04 vs. Windows 7

    After recently tracking down the major Linux kernel power regression that's present for a vast number of mobile users in Fedora 15, Ubuntu 11.04, and other recent Linux distributions shipping the 2.6.38+ kernel, the sights were turned to see how the power management of Ubuntu 11.04 compares to that of Windows 7 Professional Service Pack 1. In this article are the power consumption results of Ubuntu 11.04 compared directly to Windows 7 Professional 1 on several different systems with distinct notebook and desktop / workstation configurations.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=16189

  • #2
    How is this surprising?
    You're surprised that the platform that has more developers participating in its development actually performs better and uses less power than the junk MS has been spewing?

    Comment


    • #3
      The Catalyst Linux driver actually produced a higher frame-rate than the Windows driver.
      Well that needs to be framed somewhere

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
        How is this surprising?
        You're surprised that the platform that has more developers participating in its development actually performs better and uses less power than the junk MS has been spewing?
        All this shows is that Linux with blobs is on par with windows.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by deanjo View Post
          All this shows is that Linux with blobs is on par with windows.
          No, it shows that Linux is FASTER and USES LESS POWER than wondoze **WITH THE SAME BLOBS**, which means that **OVERALL** Linux is FASTER and USES LESS POWER than wondoze.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
            No, it shows that Linux is FASTER and USES LESS POWER than wondoze **WITH THE SAME BLOBS**, which means that **OVERALL** Linux is FASTER and USES LESS POWER than wondoze.
            On top of that, it needs all Anti-<Shit> software that consumes additional power.

            Comment


            • #7
              Stop making stupid generalisations. The interesting cases are where the two operating systems diverge significantly, such as in flash video playback.

              Michael, I presume you didn't use your "pcie_aspm=force" workaround on the T61? The idle power usage on that platform is slightly (but significantly) higher than on windows; it would be interesting to see how much lower the ubuntu power usage is with this change — would it even beat windows power usage?

              Comment


              • #8
                Michael please keep up the great work! I am seriously considering a Premium membership!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Cyborg16 View Post
                  ...

                  Michael, I presume you didn't use your "pcie_aspm=force" workaround on the T61? The idle power usage on that platform is slightly (but significantly) higher than on windows; it would be interesting to see how much lower the ubuntu power usage is with this change would it even beat windows power usage?
                  I'm with Cyborg16, it would be really cool to see the difference the workaround makes!

                  Oh, and really great work!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                    No, it shows that Linux is FASTER and USES LESS POWER than wondoze **WITH THE SAME BLOBS**, which means that **OVERALL** Linux is FASTER and USES LESS POWER than wondoze.
                    No it shows that Linux is slower (the only test that it was faster in was on the opteron system).

                    Net difference is less then 1% in power consumption which is within a reasonable margin of error meaning that it is on par.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      So the conclusion could be that Windows and Linux are both affected by the BIOS bug.

                      Or, it could be that none of the systems have a buggy BIOS.

                      TFA misses the most interesting point.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I wonder if the only system to suffer that bug is the T61, which clearly does experience a difference in usage.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Eerrrr... Michael... Why is the pro version of Windows 7 on powersave? I demand you press and hold [Windows]+[x] and see the battery getting sucked dry in 3 seconds. I can tell by the compoziting being turned off. Even if not; Windows 7 Pro doesn't have it disabled by default. No people; we can conclude that Linux without powersave and with the BIOS bug, is even more power efficient than Windows without the bug on power-save. ROFL.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
                            Eerrrr... Michael... Why is the pro version of Windows 7 on powersave?
                            Why wouldn't it be?

                            Next on the list on the comparison however Micheal I would like to see what happens when something like a bluetooth device is connected and items like a USB stick plugged in.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              What i'd like to see is a non-Ubuntu comparison. See the power consumption of Arch or Gentoo

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X