Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 53

Thread: Eight-Way BSD & Linux OS Comparison

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    215

    Default

    Last time I checked, people didn't choose their preferred operating system because of some milliseconds for specific tasks.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxToTheMax View Post
    Why are you still using Nexuiz? It's an obsolete version of the same engine as Xonotic, and is consistently outperformed by Xonotic. Not very interesting.
    Indeed, there is no good reason for using Nexiuz anymore. On a related note I wonder why Mint scored significantly worse in xonotic then Ubuntu.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Was surprised to see CentOS be fastest on Nexuiz, considering it focus on server and stability.
    Khem,.. 2.6.x kernel; 2.1 Mesa; couldn't antialias properly and was just skipping, unlike more modern competition that did their homework. BSD can't game at all. No surprises here.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    243

    Default

    Why use crappy and insecure (and hence extremely fast) ext4? Would've been nice if at least one Linux used btrfs...

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    525

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droidhacker View Post
    You know that some people choose their distribution philosophically, don't you?
    I'm not one to criticise, but most would usually base their decision on technical merit, or at the closest to the philosophy point, licensing.
    That is unless you're trying to make a personal freedom box that only contains FOSS software and can only access FOSS repositories, but few to no companies actively go out of their way to make such a setup.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intellivision View Post
    I'm not one to criticise, but most would usually base their decision on technical merit, or at the closest to the philosophy point, licensing.
    That is unless you're trying to make a personal freedom box that only contains FOSS software and can only access FOSS repositories, but few to no companies actively go out of their way to make such a setup.
    You missed one of the philosophy points. The reason I switched to Mageia is that its backed by a Non-profit organisation rather than a company, where decision making is out in the open including financial reports. I find this extremely appealing knowing were my distro is heading and a having a REAL community focus rather than the circus that Ubuntu has become lately.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    328

    Default One of most annoying misfeatures of Phoronix benchmarks is...

    The absolutely most annoying misfeature of Phoronix benchmarks to the date is that some results could miss some OSes without explanation given.

    Last 5 benchmarks show just 6 competitors instead of 8. So no "8-way". Where all those BSD-based ones? Are they off the track for some reason, or something? And apache benchmark lists just 5 competitors. What happened to another 3? They failed to run Apache? Aw, really? If they are, I think it's worth to mention it, to say the least. Don't you think it's good idea to explain where are all those missing competitors right after appropriate benchmarks? For example I'm curious what BSDs would show in Xonotic on your HD46xx card. Yet there is no results and no any comments why there is no results. Omitting half of benchmark results without explanation is one of biggest misfeatures of those benchmarks to the date.
    Last edited by 0xBADCODE; 05-27-2013 at 09:52 PM.

  8. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sergio View Post
    Why use crappy and insecure (and hence extremely fast) ext4? Would've been nice if at least one Linux used btrfs...
    Filesystems take time to mature and using a filesystem used by most distributions as default makes better when testing across operating systems unless you are running a fs benchmark. Also you might want to provide some references on why you consider Ext4 insecure.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    243

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RahulSundaram View Post
    Filesystems take time to mature and using a filesystem used by most distributions as default makes better when testing across operating systems unless you are running a fs benchmark. Also you might want to provide some references on why you consider Ext4 insecure.
    For example: http://www.unix-experience.fr/2013/2....yC9IKPC0.dpbs

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    63

    Default

    Very nice, good to see BSD compared with some Linux distros. Thank you very much for these benchmarks, Michael!

    Surprised to see that Ubuntu is about the same speed, if not faster, then MINT. I'm glad that MINT was included, because lots of people still have the perception that MINT is substantially faster than Ubuntu, but these results prove otherwise. It seems that Ubuntu and Unity (version 7) are not the pile of crap that some people will lead you to believe!

    For the people bitching about the tests used here....why don't YOU do some benchmarking and post the results online if you want to see a specific test or distro? I guess it's easier to bitch rather then doing it yourself though, lol.
    Last edited by enfocomp; 05-27-2013 at 10:57 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •