KDE & Xfce Don't Lead To Performance Wins Over Windows 8
Phoronix: KDE & Xfce Don't Lead To Performance Wins Over Windows 8
When publishing the OpenGL performance results yesterday showing Windows 8 generally leading with a performance advantage over Ubuntu Linux, there was the usual large portion of the Linux community in disbelief. For proving a point, here are now results showing the Windows 8 Intel OpenGL performance compared to Ubuntu Linux when testing the KDE and Xfce desktops.
hah damn Michael put the whiner's in their place. I personally was interested to see these tests myself, though I didn't expect KDE would have performed better than Unity or XFCE. I was surprised to see how poorly it performed.
I think what would be a nifty test is to see how Windows 8 performs when using DX and GL versions of the same games (can be a different collection of games from the tests performed here though).
Last edited by schmidtbag; 03-22-2013 at 03:15 PM.
LOL, this test doesn't proof anything. It only tells that drivers under Linux are crap and shit. You could use even OpenBox and it could be same results.
And why are you doing test with games that have ioquake3 which is some years old? Try some games from Steam like Serious Sam 3 or Anomaly Warzone Earth. And start doing min/max FPS because avr FPS doesn't show real performance of graphics cards
Last edited by olbi; 03-22-2013 at 03:31 PM.
Not only min/max but also frame latency. That is the single largest factor in "smoothness" as it is perceived by the player.
Michael, could you do similar benchmarks for other Distributions? Would be interesting...
This benchmark raises some questions:
- Intel Family 6 Model 58 Stepping 9
- Disk 187GB
- Intel Core i3 @ 1.8 Ghz
- 500 GB HDD + 24GB SSD
That test appeared flawed considering different specifications. Ubuntu might be one of the slow distributions and
Windows 8 was optimized for that ultrabook . I think the benchmark need a redo with the same hardware.
Goal! Unfortunately, Phoronix use only Ubuntu with all of its package dependences and not pure neccessary processes. Try use light distros like Archlinux, Debian or Gentoo and light WM/DE in comparison with complex distros like Fedora, OpenSuse, Mandriva, Mageia, (some)Ubuntu etc. I insist on that light distros wit light WM/DE can run more quickly than full Ubuntu installation. Why? Compare system load and communication with HW an you will see. You may also compile a special testing distro with minimum of GUI (apps and frontends needed only) to get "net" results.
Originally Posted by j2723
Last edited by pjezek; 03-31-2013 at 11:43 AM.
At these resolutions, i feel confident Intel could at least get 4 or 5 fps.
Originally Posted by startzz