Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What Shall We Benchmark Next? Let Us Know!

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

  • Michael
    replied
    Originally posted by poofyyoda View Post
    So you could then test with lower spec cards from AMD and NVidia, and whatever graphics Intel have, and see what it looks like with the native performance, and the wine performance in the drivers with Direct3D and openGL.
    Unlikely to do all of that for a tracker unless there is significant upstream interest in the tracker and also an increase in use of the affiliate shopping links / Premium subscribers / anything to justify the electricity for a number of systems dedicated to that task.

    Leave a comment:


  • MuPuF
    replied
    Wine is a really good idea.

    But, as fedora raw-hide is not stable enough, you can use archlinux (without the testing repo) and you should be able to monitor the performance of an entirely up to date system (latest stable version of every program).

    Leave a comment:


  • jakubo
    replied
    i guess anything that might help in finding regressions in any way. but it ll be hard to find anything that evolves as fast as the kernel, so that daily snapshots would make sense.
    what im missing personally is to see other hardware drivers being benchmarked, like WLAN cards, or chipsets. i would like to see if there are differences in reliability and performance, and if theres any development.
    maybe different programs: wicd vs. network manager
    that would be rather ideas for testing once in a while.
    But a transfer rate/data loss/signal strengh tests for instance would be interesting.
    i have the feeling its being neglected a bit.

    Leave a comment:


  • darkbasic
    replied
    It's not a job for Phoromatic, but I'dd like to see a benchmark of linux-2.6.33 compiled with gcc vs icc (linuxdna).

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael
    replied
    And yes, Wine is a very real and good possibility especially as the Windows PTS support evolves there will be new Wine-compatible test profiles. It should be possible to track Wine as well on a per-commit basis.

    Leave a comment:


  • poofyyoda
    replied
    A wine benchmark would be cool, if you could base it on a native game, which also has an openGL and a Direct3D renderer for the Windows version.
    (ie Unreal 2004)

    So you could then test with lower spec cards from AMD and NVidia, and whatever graphics Intel have, and see what it looks like with the native performance, and the wine performance in the drivers with Direct3D and openGL.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael
    replied
    We are seeking requests for trackers to continuously monitor performance, not individual performance article benchmarks. Post those requests in another thread as I will just be ignoring them in this thread.

    Leave a comment:


  • energyman
    replied
    md raid5 multicore processing on and off. With reiser4, btrfs, ext4.
    Bonus: stripe size influence (in that case, add xfs)
    Bonus: 2.6.33 because it supports barriers compared to 2.6.32, 31

    Leave a comment:


  • FireBurn
    replied
    I'd love to see some Gentoo benchmarks!

    Preferably comparing the time it takes to compile a system with -Os -02 and -O3 compare the disk space they take up and the responsiveness of the system, memory usage etc. I'd be interested to see the differences

    Or use -O2 and compare different versions of GCC

    Or use the same version of GCC and compare CPU schedulers or kernel versions

    Or have a system that's always running the latest Xorg components and latest next-drm kernel doing a compile test cycle effectivly monitoring git for regressions

    Leave a comment:


  • 0e8h
    replied
    I'm amazed that you have got a tool to do this. way to go!

    I''d like to see how Wine and gfx is improving, but that would be a bi-weekly event if it's remains released each fortnight.

    Is this request viable?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X