AMD Ryzen 7 7840U Windows 11 vs. Linux CPU Performance

[krunky]

But yeah, you can boast about Linux performance to your Windows friends. You know what they'll do? They will simply shrug off your achievements.

Well, technically he can't because his friends probably cares much about gaming performance, where Windows already beats, than other performance situations.

[sophisticles]

IceLake works *very* well on a clean ISO installation of Windows 11 downloaded from Microsoft's website. Speaking from experience.

However, in all my installations I artificially gimp the performance by forcing Windows to lock the CPU's processor to the lowest possible speed since all notebooks have shit-tier cooling.

As far as Linux is concerned, I won't run Icelake on any kernel below 5.16.

This laptop came with Win 10 Home and it runs like butter with that OS, and like you I always set the clock speed to the lowest, on both Windows and Linux because I rather have longevity with lower performance than get maximum performance at the risk of this thing overheating and frying the internals from all the heat.

I have to say though, that HP's tend to be very good laptops that last a long time.

[mSparks]

Sure, keep yapping all you want when many software, applications and drivers used by billions of people all over the world and in production systems only exist on Windows and no where else

Really?
Name me one that isn't available natively on macOS? (that wasn't written 20 years ago and suppassed now by several much better alternatives)

There aren't even a billion windows users, last active count was something like 200 million total, and the majority of those are software pirates in China. Even the US only has like 50 or 60 million windows PCs these days.

[Citan]

When you do benchmarking you want your system behavior to be predictable and tests to be repeatable.

If you don't prepare Windows for that, it may run certain background jobs unexpectedly (not limited to Windows Updates) and screw up your testing completely.

Linux doesn't need that because an average Linux desktop install almost has zero background jobs aside from system logging.

I wanted to end this message with some egregiously caustic remarks about someone's extremely intelligent comments but decided not to.

So Michael is doing the best ever benchmark we could hope for then since it's *actually representative of what 99% people will experience*.

Most people, even tech-savvy users, don't want to need to spend (dozens of) hours learning one system to customize it to finally have something functional and respectful of user's needs and plannings.

Nothing forces Microsoft, technically, to load up lots of background jobs. It's *their own, full-awareness choice* to reduce UX for their own benefit. It's only normal this should reflect in benchmarks.

[HEL88]

Really?
Name me one that isn't available natively on macOS? (that wasn't written 20 years ago and suppassed now by several much better alternatives)

Eg. Autodesk (mostly products for engineers):

61 products for Windows: Buy Autodesk Software | Get Prices & Buy Online | Official Autodesk Store

28 products for MacOS: Buy Autodesk Software | Get Prices & Buy Online | Official Autodesk Store

And only 6 software products for Linux: Buy Autodesk Software | Get Prices & Buy Online | Official Autodesk Store

There aren't even a billion windows users, last active count was something like 200 million total

Source please.

M$ says that in 2021 amout of active Windows 10 are 1.3 billion

Microsoft says Windows 10 now on 1.3 billion monthly active devices | ZDNET

[mSparks]

Eg. Autodesk

Billions of people using Autodesk.... software written 20 years ago and totally eclipsed by fully open source solutions like Blender + Python



Thanks for the rolling laughter.

Oh, and you are also wrong

https://www.autodesk.com/products/fusion-360/blog/how-to-install-autodesk-fusion-360-windows-mac/

Source please.

M$ says that in 2021 amout of active Windows 10 are 1.3 billion

Microsoft says Windows 10 now on 1.3 billion monthly active devices | ZDNET

Only a tiny fraction of those are PCs with windows installed on the metal being "daily driven". MS counts a new "active windows" every time someone reinstalls their 'please activate windows' VM/install.

And of that tiny fraction, 80% have an ancient low end Intel GPU that is incapable of running any software by Autodesk.

(vs an M2 mac whose GPUs are generally on par with a RX6700....)

[drakonas777]

For those who don't need Windows specific software there are 0 reasons to use that OS. Everything is worse there: starting with performance ending with that utter garbage UI/UX. Microsoft should pay money for using that shit instead asking it.

[HEL88]

Billions of people using Autodesk.... software written 20 years ago and totally eclipsed by fully open source solutions like Blender + Python

Mate, on Windows are 61 products for engineers like eg: Auocad, Civil 3D, CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics), Infrastructure Design Suite, LandXplorer, Navisworks, Plant Design Suite, BIM, Revit LT, Robot Structural Analyst etc.

61 different programs, and you come up with blender and python.

And you're talking about some enigmatic open source counterparts that don't exist.

You've humiliated yourself. You obviously don't know what you're talking about.

Typical screaming fanboy of you. Screaming nonsense.

20 years ago

A Autocad has 40 years not 20. Just like CATIA. Siemens NX has 50 years. That's why these programs are unbeatable for professional use.

Blender (now 30 years old) or StarOffice (40 years old, later OpenOffice) were commercial programs which the sources have been released.

Without such action, programs written from scratch have no chance with mature programs.

There is no open source program that can compare with commercial ones in the field of engineering.

Thanks for the rolling laughter.

The funny thing is that for 30 years of agitation and persuasion, linux which is supposedly 'the better' system for desktop has only reached 3% of the market. And only people related to IT use it, because others do not want it for free. This looks like a big failure, not a success.

[paulocoghi]

If ~10% or so higher performance is everything you need from the OS I've got bad news for you: the Linux market share on desktop remains in low single digits.

People choose something which works better, not something that performs marginally better. But yeah, you can boast about Linux performance to your Windows friends. You know what they'll do? They will simply shrug off your achievements.

Neither your message nor mine were talking about Windows vs Linux marketshare. But since you brought it on, here is two things:

1. In many scenarios, Windows is more advisable to use. The same goes the other way around. There are a lot of factors, both technical and personal, and this is so obvious, that I was not talking about that. Your argument seems childish considering the context.

2. For the scenarios both operating systems serve (and Linux has served me perfectly for over 15 years), fluidity certainly counts in favor of Linux as a factor in the decision making. Simple as that.

How difficult it is for people today to agree on simple facts.

[avis]

Neither your message nor mine were talking about Windows vs Linux marketshare. But since you brought it on, here is two things:

1. In many scenarios, Windows is more advisable to use. The same goes the other way around. There are a lot of factors, both technical and personal, and this is so obvious, that I was not talking about that. Your argument seems childish considering the context.

2. For the scenarios both operating systems serve (and Linux has served me perfectly for over 15 years), fluidity certainly counts in favor of Linux as a factor in the decision making. Simple as that.

How difficult it is for people today to agree on simple facts.

Speaking of facts:

Fluidity is still on the Windows side as it offers HW acceleration of almost everything under almost all scenarios. In Linux HW acceleration is a huge hit and miss. HW accelerated video decoding is not available for NVIDIA users and not because it's not available but because both Chrome and Firefox have deliberately not enabled it.

And I have a ton of doubts about "served me perfectly". I'll just call it a blatant bluff.

But since you're quite invested in being a dedicated Linux user, that might indicate fanboyism, thus bias, thus skewed a perception and sprinkle of lies.

I've been a Linux user a little bit longer, for more than 25 years now. Sorry to break it to you but as a constant bug reporter and debugger I hate lies.