Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Thread: PC-BSD 10.0 vs. PC-BSD 9.2 vs. Ubuntu 13.10 Benchmarks

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,186

    Default PC-BSD 10.0 vs. PC-BSD 9.2 vs. Ubuntu 13.10 Benchmarks

    Phoronix: PC-BSD 10.0 vs. PC-BSD 9.2 vs. Ubuntu 13.10 Benchmarks

    After running through some challenges in setting up PC-BSD/FreeBSD 10.0 and its many changes, here are benchmarks of the feature-rich operating system update. Benchmarks were done on the same laptop of PC-BSD 10.0, the former PC-BSD 9.2 release, and Ubuntu 13.10.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=19912

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    459

    Default

    All of the operating systems were cleanly installed and left using their default settings/packages, including their default file-systems, default compiler choices, etc, since they are all design choices made by the distribution vendor.
    So, PC-BSD10 comes with the nVidia blob by default? Really?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    331

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: PC-BSD 10.0 vs. PC-BSD 9.2 vs. Ubuntu 13.10 Benchmarks

    After running through some challenges in setting up PC-BSD/FreeBSD 10.0 and its many changes, here are benchmarks of the feature-rich operating system update. Benchmarks were done on the same laptop of PC-BSD 10.0, the former PC-BSD 9.2 release, and Ubuntu 13.10.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=19912
    Im looking forward to the gcc vs gcc benchmarks. While it's interesting what performance *BSD users can expect using precompiled packages, the full potential of the platform is surely of interest, too.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rexilion View Post
    So, PC-BSD10 comes with the nVidia blob by default? Really?
    According to Wikipedia, yes.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    3

    Default PC-BSD is heavy on features by default.

    Where are the gaming benchmarks?

    Imo, PC-BSD is heavily modified with lot of added "extras", which slow it down. For instance, there is not option to choose UFS as the default filesystem while installation. I think it will perform better without zfs, which is the default.

    So can we have GhostBSD(FreeBSD with GUI) vs Debian vs Ubuntu?

    Thanks!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    489

    Default

    FreeBSD 10 is now defaulting on LLVM/Clang 3.4 and I suspect will move to 3.5 when it's released and FreeBSD 10.1 is released.

    I imagine PC-BSD will follow suit.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oleid View Post
    Im looking forward to the gcc vs gcc benchmarks. While it's interesting what performance *BSD users can expect using precompiled packages, the full potential of the platform is surely of interest, too.
    BSD no longer installs GCC by default. It's optional.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    331

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    BSD no longer installs GCC by default. It's optional.
    Sure, therefore my posting.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Far far away ...
    Posts
    6

    Default

    PC-BSD 10 seems to be nearly the same slow ****** as FreeBSD 10.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
    FreeBSD 10 is now defaulting on LLVM/Clang 3.4 and I suspect will move to 3.5 when it's released and FreeBSD 10.1 is released.

    I imagine PC-BSD will follow suit.
    Are you use as Clang 3.4 is only in head at the moment?? Stable 10 defaults to Clang 3.3 (http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/stable/10/?view=log)

Posting Permissions

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