1. Computers
  2. Display Drivers
  3. Graphics Cards
  4. Memory
  5. Motherboards
  6. Processors
  7. Software
  8. Storage
  9. Operating Systems


Facebook RSS Twitter Twitter Google Plus


Phoronix Test Suite

OpenBenchmarking.org

Real World Benchmarks Of The EXT4 File-System

Michael Larabel

Published on 3 December 2008
Written by Michael Larabel
Page 9 of 9 - 100 Comments

So what's there to gather from these tests? EXT4 isn't a file-system to trench all other Linux file-systems, but that's to be expected as otherwise there would not be significant resources going into btrfs. EXT4 is, however, a nice update based on EXT3 that makes it an appealing step-in solution. While maintaining forwards and backwards compatibility with this Linux file-system that has been in the mainline kernel for nearly eight years, EXT4 introduces Extents to replace the block mapping scheme used on earlier generations of the extended file-system, persistent pre-allocation, delayed allocation, precision timestamps, and journal check summing.

Between our Bonnie++, IOzone, and Flexible IO Tester test trials, the EXT4 file-system had exhibited the best performance in five of the eight tests. SGI's XFS file-system was in first the other three times. While this shows the abilities of each file-system, it doesn't mean much unless your job consists of running disk benchmarks day-in and day-out.

In Nexuiz, World of Padman, and Unreal Tournament 2004 to represent gaming on the Linux operating system, the results were virtually identical. To the Linux gamer, switching to EXT4 or XFS will not really mean much in the way of improved frame-rates. If though you deal with compressing files often, of the four file-systems tested, the best appears to be EXT4 or XFS. When it came to multimedia encoding, we cannot call a decisive winner. In our GnuPG encryption test, EXT3 was the fastest followed by XFS. However, in the Bork encryption test, EXT4 was the fastest followed by EXT3. EXT3 does still appear to have some advantages.

EXT4 is clearly a significant improvement over EXT3 when it came to the pure disk benchmarks, however, in the real world, saying better performance should not be used as a reason to replace your existing EXT3 or XFS partitions. In our tests that cater towards Linux desktop users and gamers, EXT4 hadn't delivered a sizable quantitative advantage. That's not to say though it's not worth switching to EXT4. EXT4 is more scalable, more efficient through the use of Extents, supports larger disk capacities, can handle twice the number of sub-directories, is capable of handling online defragmentation, and there is improved reliability via journal checksums. What perhaps is more important is that with the addition of these new features, the performance hasn't regressed. Also, when testing the EXT4 file-system, we hadn't run into any problems with stability, file corruption, or any other issues.

EXT4 is declared stable in the soon to be released Linux 2.6.28 kernel, but from there it isn't clear how big of a role EXT4 will play within the Linux ecosystem. Chances are we would see it be adopted officially by Fedora or another bleeding-edge distribution before it's used by default within Ubuntu or a commercially supported distribution. The development timeline for btrfs places a 1.0 release in Q4'08, but it doesn't look we'll see a stable release of that until next year. Depending upon how fast that file-system is hardened and what adoption rates it sees, it may largely influence how EXT4 fairs as a temporary alternative.

If you would like to run your own file-system benchmarks, check out the Phoronix Test Suite.

About The Author
Michael Larabel is the principal author of Phoronix.com and founded the web-site in 2004 with a focus on enriching the Linux hardware experience and being the largest web-site devoted to Linux hardware reviews, particularly for products relevant to Linux gamers and enthusiasts but also commonly reviewing servers/workstations and embedded Linux devices. Michael has written more than 10,000 articles covering the state of Linux hardware support, Linux performance, graphics hardware drivers, and other topics. Michael is also the lead developer of the Phoronix Test Suite, Phoromatic, and OpenBenchmarking.org automated testing software. He can be followed via and or contacted via .
Latest Articles & Reviews
  1. Samsung 850 EVO SSD Linux Benchmarks
  2. Kubuntu 15.04 Is Turning Out Quite Nice, Good Way To Try Out The Latest KDE
  3. 5-Way Linux Distribution Comparison On The Core i3 NUC
  4. OCZ ARC 100 Linux SSD Benchmarks
  5. Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Works Great As A Linux Ultrabook
  6. Transcend SSD370 256GB
Latest Linux News
  1. AMD Will Release Mantle Programming Guide, API Reference This Month
  2. Unreal Engine Made Free By Epic Games
  3. Qt 5.5 Alpha Is Getting Close, But Still Behind Schedule
  4. OpenBSD Sponsors Work For Better Browser Security
  5. Improved ODF Reading Support Comes To KDE's Calligra
  6. Another Step Closer On The New Linux Benchmarking Test Farm
  7. Confirmed: Vulkan Is The Next-Gen Graphics API
  8. Kdenlive Ported To Qt5/KF5, Coming To KDE Applications 15.04
  9. HTC & Valve Partnered Up For The Steam VR Headset
  10. 8cc: A Small C11 Compiler
Most Viewed News This Week
  1. Screenshots Of The GNOME 3.16 Changes
  2. More Proof That Allwinner Is Violating The GPL
  3. The Tremendous Features Of Fedora 22
  4. Krita 2.9 Released, Their Biggest Release Ever
  5. A Single UEFI Executable With The Linux Kernel, Initrd & Command Line
  6. Linux 4.0 Doesn't Have The Weirdest Codename
  7. Canonical Comes Up With Its Own FUSE Filesystem For Linux Containers
  8. Firefox 36 Brings Full HTTP/2 Support
%%CLICK_URL_UNESC%%