Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FreeBSD 8.0 vs. Ubuntu 9.10 Benchmarks

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

  • risner
    replied
    Help

    I have a new Quad Core Xeon (Nethalm/Core i7) ESXi box with 6 gb ram and 1.5 TB disk for a week.

    I've already set up a FreeBSD properly in it (ZFS filesystem, optimized kernel/system, still gcc 4.2.1 but gcc 4.4 installed for ports.)

    Anyone want to help me do any of these:
    1) Install Unbuntu/Gentoo/Debian in a VM and optimize it.
    2) Install and run the Phoronix Test Suite inside FreeBSD/Ubuntu so I don't have to learn how?

    I'll work with anyone, provide access to the ESX vSphere client, do what I know how to do (install FreeBSD/ESXi/Gentoo.)

    Would need to only have one VM running at one instant in time during testing to just get reasonable results.

    Any takers?

    Leave a comment:


  • masinick
    replied
    Every published test that I have ever seen shows Linux systems beating out FreeBSD systems in at least 70% of the tests. There are a few where FreeBSD does well, but there are a few others where Linux systems, especially Ubuntu, really leave FreeBSD in the dust.

    In my own usage of Linux and BSD systems, both run fine, but if you run a GUI and use them for interactive use, Linux systems are more convenient to install and without a doubt faster in feel, which supports the benchmark research.

    BSD based systems are lauded as great servers, but Red Hat Enterprise Linux has great support, which makes it a winner in the enterprise. Based on the tests here, consistently finding CentOS to be faster in the majority of tests, I don't see how we can come to any other conclusion than that the majority of Linux systems utilize system resources more efficiently than the majority of BSD based systems.

    I first saw this in 1995 when a 100 MHz Micron PC running Slackware booted and started a light desktop environment faster than a 200 MHz AlphaStation 200 with more memory, bigger and faster disks, and generally more capabilities. I am sure that the Alpha would toast that old Micron on compiler performance and floating point arithmetic, but nevertheless, the inexpensive Micron system with Slackware felt more responsive to the touch - noticeably so, compared to one of the fastest workstations of that era. More seat of the pants evidence of something I noticed more than a decade ago.

    More recently, my Debian systems boot to the desktop and respond more rapidly to routine input in a GUI than the very nice, but so-so performing PC-BSD. Nothing empirical here, just seat of the pants observation. But coupled with these benchmarks, I'd say the evidence is pretty strong: Ubuntu beats FreeBSD, Ubuntu beats PC-BSD (an earlier study here I believe), CentOS beats FreeBSD (as discussed in this thread), Slackware beats BSD UNIX in the nineties in response and feel, Debian beats PC-BSD is response and feel; subjective but observed. That seems to be enough evidence, especially without much contradicting this information, first observed, then empirically confirmed.

    Leave a comment:


  • energyman
    replied
    it does not matter, even if compared to rhel or sles the bsd fanboys will scream no-fair. Except when they win somewhere - than everything was fair of course.

    btw:
    http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=563624

    freebsd fanboys come up with crap like this:
    http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/compar...-bsd-oses.html

    security 'very good'? FreeBSD does not fix local exploits! filesystem #good'? UFS SUCKS ASS. And everybody knows it. It is slow even compared to ext2. And despite the fact that freebsd routinely gets its ass kicked (except for some pbscure mysql benchmark a while ago), they claim that FreeBSD is faster. Yes, that is fanboyism for you. Ignore facts, spout crap. Never show evidence and if somebody shows contradicting evidence yell 'not fair'.

    Never confuse BSD fanboys with facts.
    Last edited by energyman; 09-30-2009, 11:59 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • masinick
    replied
    I would really like to see a stable Debian or Debian based distribution other than Ubuntu go up against FreeBSD too. I believe there were recent tests comparing Debian Lenny against Ubuntu and if I am not mistaken, Lenny was able to outpace Ubuntu, particularly in anything involving Python scripts (which are less common in Debian than Ubuntu, leading to more overhead in Ubuntu). The differences were not striking, but Debian did seem to be a bit quicker. It ought to do well compared to FreeBSD.

    Slackware may be another distribution worth comparing to FreeBSD, especially since Slackware uses a lot of BSD conventions; it'd be interesting to see how they face off.

    Leave a comment:


  • Apopas
    replied
    Originally posted by xpto View Post
    Someone said that he never saw *BSD to be faster in real tests.
    Well..I never saw *Ubuntu being used in the real world.

    Comparing a desktop distro with a server distro is totally unusefull.
    Even if it was true that FreeBSD was a bit more slower, no one cares!

    FreeBSD is one of the most solid and advanced operating systems in the world, while Ubuntu is just one more desktop linux distro.

    So please, stop writing this crap. you'll influence our children's.
    So with a comparison between *BSD and a server Linux distro you would be fine?

    Leave a comment:


  • Apopas
    replied
    Originally posted by risner View Post
    GPL (v1, v2, and to a greater extent v3) require source to be provided and FSF is very busy suing Cisco and anyone else using Linux without making source available.
    Yup, that's exactly the point.

    Leave a comment:


  • clau
    replied
    Originally posted by xpto View Post
    FreeBSD is one of the most solid and advanced operating systems in the world, while Ubuntu is just one more desktop linux distro.

    So please, stop writing this crap. you'll influence our children's.
    Actually, as far as I can tell there is only one guy in this thread fighting like his life depends on Ubuntu being faster and you can easily spot him . Everyone else has a good sense of logic and can sustain a dialog.

    Leave a comment:


  • kraftman
    replied
    Originally posted by xpto View Post
    Someone said that he never saw *BSD to be faster in real tests.
    Well..I never saw *Ubuntu being used in the real world.

    Comparing a desktop distro with a server distro is totally unusefull.
    Even if it was true that FreeBSD was a bit more slower, no one cares!

    FreeBSD is one of the most solid and advanced operating systems in the world, while Ubuntu is just one more desktop linux distro.
    Where this "someone" said Ubuntu was used in comparison to FreeBSD (Gentoo and Fedora were used as far as I remember)? You can search in other threads for links. Keep in mind probably every system can be tuned to win some benchmark. Someone else explained this much better before. Ubuntu is also one of the most advanced operating systems in the world thanks to the Linux kernel (I don't know if U is also solid or not, but no one cares when comes to Ubuntu , however Debian is!). Look for DNS tests and Ingo's response to some stupid benchmark. Thankfully we don't have a flame war here yet...


    @Energyman

    bullshit. FreeBSD sucked in all 'server' related tests of that article - and there are enough benchmarks in the wild showing FreeBSD sucking compared to linux.
    It's hard to say in my opinion (different GCC) Some time ago OS X was also "the fastest" here, but...
    Last edited by kraftman; 09-30-2009, 09:20 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • energyman
    replied
    Originally posted by xpto View Post
    Someone said that he never saw *BSD to be faster in real tests.
    Well..I never saw *Ubuntu being used in the real world.

    Comparing a desktop distro with a server distro is totally unusefull.
    Even if it was true that FreeBSD was a bit more slower, no one cares!

    FreeBSD is one of the most solid and advanced operating systems in the world, while Ubuntu is just one more desktop linux distro.

    So please, stop writing this crap. you'll influence our children's.
    bullshit. FreeBSD sucked in all 'server' related tests of that article - and there are enough benchmarks in the wild showing FreeBSD sucking compared to linux.

    There is a reason why linux is much more popular for servers and HPC - and it has nothing to do with fanboyism.

    Leave a comment:


  • nanonyme
    replied
    Originally posted by energyman View Post
    GCC does not change any licences at all.

    And it DOES NOT CHANGE the licence of the source code.

    The resulting binary is a different theme - because of linking to libgcc but the FSF already stood up and clarified everything around it.

    This is just another case of the BSD crowd masturbating about some licence nonesense so they can feel victimized.
    I believed as much. My point was mostly that it would probably be a copyright violation if it tried to do so by its own.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X