Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

macOS 10.12 Sierra vs. Ubuntu 16.04 Linux Benchmarking

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

  • #51
    Originally posted by name99 View Post

    You're equating "advanced" with "fastest". That's a very silly mistake.
    There are multiple dimensions of "advanced".
    On many of them Apple does better (security, energy, ease of writing drivers).
    On some of Linux does better (scaling to many cores) but in a way that is very difficult to code, and unlikely to be the direction Apple takes.
    On some of them ("smoothness and interactivity") we don't have the benchmarks to prove the point definitively, but all anecdotes suggest that Apple does better on equivalent hardware.
    Apple does not have better security, I don't know about energy, and wat is that "ease of writing drivers"?

    Scaling to multicore in a way that is difficult to code? can you explain?

    For the smoothness and interactivity I don't know, but at the end of the day it's just heavy use of RAM caching.

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
      Apple does not have better security, I don't know about energy, and wat is that "ease of writing drivers"?

      Scaling to multicore in a way that is difficult to code? can you explain?

      For the smoothness and interactivity I don't know, but at the end of the day it's just heavy use of RAM caching.
      Apple machines have quite small amounts of RAM. There are Macbooks with 4 GB of RAM on sale in the stores as we speak. What's even worse is that the chips are soldered so you can't replace them. 4 GB is too little especially on OS X. On Linux it's ok for lower end systems. The price for 32 GB is around $110. It's funny how they can't afford 8 GB (< $30) on expensive laptops.

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by Michael View Post

        Unfortunately Clear Linux doesn't work on the MacBooks, tried it out.
        Fair enough. What about the disk and compile time benchmarks? Is there any hope that the future Phoronix benchmarks don't have these flaws. The results aren't really that useful and totally unfair.

        Comment


        • #54
          For security I would argue X is a big security risk, otherwise Linux might have an edge. Apple recently has taken to trying to urge users to use security features and better passwords, that can help a lot. For smoothness and interactivity it is pretty nice to have a user interface written to take advantage of Metal.

          Comment


          • #55
            Originally posted by labyrinth153 View Post
            Pawlerson is a troll, but yes the filesystem does suck. And because it writes back the data differently than doing it directly on os x. Apfs looks good so far I don't have a fast enough drive to do a serious benchmark of it.
            No, you're a troll who's defending proprietary crap from theft company.

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by name99 View Post

              You're equating "advanced" with "fastest". That's a very silly mistake.
              There are multiple dimensions of "advanced".
              On many of them Apple does better (security, energy, ease of writing drivers).
              On some of Linux does better (scaling to many cores) but in a way that is very difficult to code, and unlikely to be the direction Apple takes.
              On some of them ("smoothness and interactivity") we don't have the benchmarks to prove the point definitively, but all anecdotes suggest that Apple does better on equivalent hardware.
              What a bunch of crap. Apple and security?! This is madness! It's probably less secure than winblows. Ease of writing drivers? Then tell me why it's years behind Linux in graphics? There's no single 'advanced' thing in os x.

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by labyrinth153 View Post
                For security I would argue OS X is a big security risk.
                Fixed that for you

                Comment


                • #58
                  Is accused of being a troll. Denies it. Trolls.

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by labyrinth153 View Post
                    Is accused of being a troll. Denies it. Trolls.
                    He trolls better than you, and is still pretty much right too. Apple has never been terribly safe, most of its "safety" came from the fact that it wasn't windows (just like linux).

                    Metal is also self-hurt bullshit that is going to nuke what little possibility of cross-platform programs they had. Pretty much everyone that isn't making macOS-only products intends to use wrappers to offload Vulkan to Metal, or plain dx-to-openGL wrappers.

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      No, seriously dude. Xorg is my main worry with Linux security and its not a big worry. That isn't trolling. As for the future of metal, I would very much enjoy metal ports of games and software. If not I can always move back to Linux.

                      This kind of rage baiting bs you are doing here is trolling. I guess my post you quoted was too. So lets move on shall we?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X