Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Ryzen 5 4500U Performance On Windows 10 vs. Six Linux Distributions

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by King Mucus View Post
    Very insightful. Loved those benchmarks, Michael. Congratulations on your great job!

    They really show that Intel is not prioritizing gaming performance at all on their distro and that Firefox is underoptimized on Linux under its default settings.

    Now if you could get someone to optimize Gentoo for you, with custom kernel, -O3 and the gentoolto overlay, that would be an order of magnitude of awesomeness. I know it might be a lot of work, but can envision willing volunteers to do it for you on Freenode's #gentoo channel or in the Gentoo forums.

    I would become a Premium subscriber if you managed to get a ├╝berriced, super optimized Gentoo setup on your benchmarks from now on, even if the results end up disappointing the fanboy who is writing this message to you.
    -O3? If you're going for the most optimized build possible, you might as well use -Ofast.

    Comment


    • #22
      Yeah, I am also missing some Gentoo here: In the end of the day I am super curious to know how a binary based distro would compare with a port based one!

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by CochainComplex View Post

        geometric mean says something different. It can not be always the last otherwise it would end up last in the geometric mean.
        I'm pretty sure the geometric mean is calculated wrong. The values should be normalized, so around 1, not around 10+.

        micheal I think something in the way your software generates the geometric means is wrong. The values should be normalised before being multiplied. See this example.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by CochainComplex View Post
          Is Clear Linux falling behind because it is running on an AMD or are this the first effects of - we will focus on server and cloud not desktop ?
          I wondered the same and suspect its probably a little of both.

          I already posted with the Intel Clear Team on how their builds can't enable certain features of the Ryzen Mobile line.

          With all the reorgs going on at Intel and especially in the open source area, I doubt they will put any energy into AMD support, especially mobile.

          Unless someone is in the mood to compile Clear Linux and regression test it on a modern AMD mobile product, I wouldn't place too much more expectations on it.

          As for Clear on AMD Mobile:

          Will it boot? Yes
          Will it run? Yes
          Will it perform advanced features? Increasingly No.

          Comment


          • #25
            Well, Clear Linux had the most 1st place finishes and performed significantly better than the competition on CPU intensive tasks. It performed poorly on games, which are normally more GPU than CPU intensive. As such, I don't think it would be reasonable to state that Intel is making an effort to artificially hamper AMD processors performance on their distro.

            Other than just setting mtune and march to a specific Intel architecture, it would require meddling on the compilers themselves. The latter would be pointless. If they made the former, it proves that new AMD processors are largely compatible with Intel processors instructions, I think.

            Alas, if Michael actually decides to begin benchmarking Gentoo, it would be nice if he activated the ~amd64 mask for the kernel itself and every package installed (or even globally). That would contribute even more to the overall 1337ness and awesomeness, at least in theory. It would also be much appreciated.
            Last edited by King Mucus; 06-28-2020, 01:06 AM.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by AndyChow View Post

              I'm pretty sure the geometric mean is calculated wrong. The values should be normalized, so around 1, not around 10+.

              micheal I think something in the way your software generates the geometric means is wrong. The values should be normalised before being multiplied. See this example.
              You might be right I once mentioned inconsistences here the underlying Data looks like this
              Geometric mean in the bar plot 363.01 vs. 368.48 compared to in the rawdata 363.010 vs 357.149

              Comment

              Working...
              X