Mac OS X 10.5 vs. Ubuntu 8.10 Benchmarks

[Thetargos]

So, why you asked: ? If those drivers aren't using mesa? Man, you're amazing me, but it doesn't matter...

No, they don't. They use the ICD approach, providing themselves the GL library, why do you think you have a different libGL with the nVidia and fglrx drivers? ; and the GL library usually conflicts with the Mesa library included in most systems, and distribution packages manage to keep both libraries, making the proprietary GL library visible to the applications, but not breaking the installed Mesa package.

I asked for non Apple's link, but thanks. In this case they're probably objective.

And I provided those Granted, I know not many give the same credit to the Wikipedia, but stillf or computing topics their articles are usually very well done.

@Thetargos

Thanks for this exhaustive comment .

You are welcome... It took me some three hours to post (as I wanted to make sure all my info was right )

[unlotto]

I'm confused... didn't ubuntu x86_64 win most of the tests?

Why the dissappointment with the ubuntu results, that some of the posts here express?
The Nexuiz tests on intel graphics are not interesting to me.
sqlite test is important. Most sane people would use noatime or relatime, which should have dramatic results.

I would love to see someone with similar/identical hardware post some PTS global links with different configurations/distros for comparison. Also, GNU/Linux is as much about choice as anything else - having the most default setup beat osx is just an added bonus.

[deanjo]

I'm confused... didn't ubuntu x86_64 win most of the tests?

Why the dissappointment with the ubuntu results, that some of the posts here express?
The Nexuiz tests on intel graphics are not interesting to me.
sqlite test is important. Most sane people would use noatime or relatime, which should have dramatic results.

I would love to see someone with similar/identical hardware post some PTS global links with different configurations/distros for comparison. Also, GNU/Linux is as much about choice as anything else - having the most default setup beat osx is just an added bonus.

Some people are just ticked OS X beat ubuntu in i/o limited and graphics tests. Compilation tests don't mean much either as different libraries and options will be different on both systems. One has to compile more the other doesn't.

[kraftman]

Some people are just ticked OS X beat ubuntu in i/o limited and graphics tests. Compilation tests don't mean much either as different libraries and options will be different on both systems. One has to compile more the other doesn't.

I/O limited and graphics tests don't mean much either in Phoronix test. You look like MACOS fanboy to me.

The blobs don't use mesa that's why.

Read 100x times more and maybe you will understand what I meant...

[deanjo]

I/O limited and graphics tests don't mean much either in Phoronix test. You look like MACOS fanboy too me.

I give credit were credit is due with a deep understanding of the issues not based on "brand X sucks" without having a clue about the subject.

Read 100x times more and maybe you will understand what I meant...

Maybe perhaps make your comments in a clear, concise manner that doesn't require filling in of the blanks and you will be more pleased with the answers. As it stands , you don't even seem to understand what uses mesa and what uses a optimized ICD.

[kraftman]

I give credit were credit is due with a deep understanding of the issues not based on "brand X sucks" without having a clue about the subject.

You sound really funny :> You're just Mac OS fanboy (wait, you're dev probably) and you try to defend it. Luckily some people understand those issues and they're objective in their clues. I don't expect that Apple dev will be objective...

Maybe perhaps make your comments in a clear, concise manner that doesn't require filling in of the blanks and you will be more pleased with the answers. As it stands , you don't even seem to understand what uses mesa and what uses a optimized ICD.

It was clear, but due to your misunderstanding it has complicated a little. I was talking about something else... Simple question: do binary blobs use mesa (NVIDIA driver especially)? I want to hear it from you and it will be great if you just say: yes or no.

[kraftman]

Here's a great article about tunning EXT3 file system:

http://www.heise-online.co.uk/open/Tuning-the-Linux-file-system-Ext3--/features/110398/0

[deanjo]

You sound really funny :> You're just Mac OS fanboy (wait, you're dev probably) and you try to defend it. Luckily some people understand those issues and they're objective in their clues. I don't expect that Apple dev will be objective...

I develop for many OS's windows, *nix, osx. Currently coding satellite control systems.

It was clear, but due to your misunderstanding it has complicated a little. I was talking about something else... Simple question: do binary blobs use mesa (NVIDIA driver especially)? I want to hear it from you and it will be great if you just say: yes or no.

No the blobs do not use mesa.

[kraftman]

No the blobs do not use mesa.

So, that's probably why blobs bypass MUCH of X :> You asked me before why I think so.

I wonder what journaling options were used during the tests. It seems that it matters a lot:

http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-fs8.html

Theoretically, data=journal mode is the slowest journaling mode of all, since data gets written to disk twice rather than once. However, it turns out that in certain situations, data=journal mode can be blazingly fast.

Somehow, ext3's data=journal mode is incredibly well-suited to situations where data needs to be read from and written to disk at the same time.

[deanjo]

So, that's probably why blobs bypass MUCH of X :> You asked me before why I think so.

I wonder what journaling options were used during the tests. It seems that it matters a lot:

http://www-128.ibm.com/developerwork...ary/l-fs8.html

Heh, did you take a look at the date on that article? Ext3 is not known for it's speed nowdays. Ars technica did a good breakdown of the filesystems out there a while back.

http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/past-present-future-file-systems.ars/1

There is also a good debian paper.

http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/388

To quote the ars article:

Despite valiant attempts to establish ReiserFS as a new standard, and the measurable superiority of systems like XFS, most Linux users are still using ext3. ext3 is not new. It's not super fast. It's not sexy. It won't cook your dinner. But it is tried and true, and for many people, that is more important.