Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Benchmarks: FreeBSD 13 vs. NetBSD 9.2 vs. OpenBSD 7 vs. DragonFlyBSD 6 vs. Linux

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

  • Benchmarks: FreeBSD 13 vs. NetBSD 9.2 vs. OpenBSD 7 vs. DragonFlyBSD 6 vs. Linux

    Phoronix: Benchmarks: FreeBSD 13 vs. NetBSD 9.2 vs. OpenBSD 7 vs. DragonFlyBSD 6 vs. Linux

    It's been a while since last having a hearty BSD benchmark comparison on Phoronix in part due to the latest hardware platforms generally lagging behind with how well supported they are by the various BSDs. But stemming from a Phoronix Premium supporter recently requesting some fresh BSD benchmarks, here is a look at how DragonFlyBSD 6.0.1, FreeBSD 13.0, NetBSD 9.2, and OpenBSD 7.0 are competing against various Linux distributions like CentOS, Clear Linux, and Ubuntu.

    https://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=30747

  • #2
    thank you for covering BSD profoundly

    Comment


    • #3
      Wow what an awesome read! Feels like the good old days of Phoronix again! Thanks so much for putting together this shootout! A few key takeaways, DragonflyBSD deserves to be considered, it is no longer just a research project. I will stop referring it as the 3 BSDs and now say 4. It is legit. The claim that NetBSD strikes a balance between the performance of FreeBSD and the security of OpenBSD has some merit. The claim that disabling SMT has no effect in OpenBSD is false. It some workloads it was almost exactly half of the other *BSDs because of the no SMT. Overall some of the best benchmarking in a long time. Thanks for getting around to this! Appreciate it!

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by kylew77 View Post
        Wow what an awesome read! Feels like the good old days of Phoronix again! Thanks so much for putting together this shootout! A few key takeaways, DragonflyBSD deserves to be considered, it is no longer just a research project. I will stop referring it as the 3 BSDs and now say 4. It is legit. The claim that NetBSD strikes a balance between the performance of FreeBSD and the security of OpenBSD has some merit. The claim that disabling SMT has no effect in OpenBSD is false. It some workloads it was almost exactly half of the other *BSDs because of the no SMT. Overall some of the best benchmarking in a long time. Thanks for getting around to this! Appreciate it!
        If I may be honest, this is a collection of fairly meaningless benchmarks. Systems like FreeBSD, CentOS, Ubuntu, NetBSD etc are mostly used as web server or database.

        Where are the Apache, NginX, PostgreSQL and Redis benchmarks? And where are the measurements of network performance?
        We might then be able to see a different and more important reality:

        Nginx Perfomace - FreeBSD vs CentOS (Under Heavy Load) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGo4iyNwo_Y
        PostgreSQL benchmark on FreeBSD, CentOS, Ubuntu Debian and openSUSE https://redbyte.eu/en/blog/postgresq...bian-opensuse/
        FreeBSD/Ubuntu Dual Boot Homelab in The Bedroom by the bed testbed https://adventurist.me/posts/00307

        Why does the article not mention anywhere that Docker is much more insecure than FreeBSD Jails and has already caused billions of dollars in cybercrime costs?

        Or why is it not mentioned that Bhyve is the fastest hypervisor currently?

        Comment


        • #5
          About what I expected. Linux with the clear win because of how much development activity it has. DFBSD with slightly more wins than FBSD thanks to lightweight threads and OBSD with the most tradeoffs in exchange for security.

          Thanks a lot for these benchmarks!

          Comment


          • #6
            Sorry for the seemingly ignorant question..

            Is there a reason for not including Fedora?

            Is Ubuntu just more recognized as a server OS?

            (I would think more people could come up with Fedora as a server than Clear..)

            Thanks in advance.

            Comment


            • #7
              Michael,

              you wrote "The same system was used throughout for all testing with the 16-core/32-thread Core i9 10980XE at stock speeds" -- but obviously this is an mistake as the CPU does have 18 cores/36-threads.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by kgardas View Post
                Michael,

                you wrote "The same system was used throughout for all testing with the 16-core/32-thread Core i9 10980XE at stock speeds" -- but obviously this is an mistake as the CPU does have 18 cores/36-threads.
                Whoops, typo fixed, thanks. Michael
                Michael Larabel
                http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by therealbcook View Post
                  Sorry for the seemingly ignorant question..

                  Is there a reason for not including Fedora?

                  Is Ubuntu just more recognized as a server OS?

                  (I would think more people could come up with Fedora as a server than Clear..)

                  Thanks in advance.
                  Just only so much time in a day...
                  Michael Larabel
                  http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    No network benchmarks? Guess I will be smoking more then.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X