Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

macOS 10.12.5 vs. Ubuntu 17.04 vs. Clear Linux On A Mac Mini

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

  • macOS 10.12.5 vs. Ubuntu 17.04 vs. Clear Linux On A Mac Mini

    Phoronix: macOS 10.12.5 vs. Ubuntu 17.04 vs. Clear Linux On A Mac Mini

    Last week I posted some fresh macOS vs. Linux Intel OpenGL benchmarks while for those curious about the CPU performance, here are some additional benchmarks from that Mac Mini system.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=24774

  • #2
    Hmm this "most world's advanced operating system, jam packed with awesome features" doesn't look so good right now.

    but I like it anyway.

    Comment


    • #3
      I wonder what leads to these pgsql results. most surprising

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by balouba View Post
        I wonder what leads to these pgsql results. most surprising
        I think I can quote this from a previous benchmark:

        Originally posted by Sloth View Post
        The postgres results look like fsync wasn't actually syncing on OSX. Sure enough:

        http://www.postgresql.org/message-id...mail.gmail.com

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by sajmon5544 View Post
          Hmm this "most world's advanced operating system, jam packed with awesome features" doesn't look so good right now.

          but I like it anyway.
          Running a BSD kernel on top of the Mach kernel is anything but ideal for maximizing performance and minimizing latency. Then again, neither of those two are the reason why mac users use macOS.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by tildearrow View Post

            I think I can quote this from a previous benchmark:
            Thanks. Saved me pulling that up. Again.

            Really this benchmark should be dropped, or fsync disabled on Linux. As it is, it's straight up misleading.

            Comment


            • #7
              It won in a few benchmarks. Maybe revisit the database benchmarks with apfs. Though considering it is probably closer to zfs/btrfs, it might not be the best for those kind of workloads,

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Beherit View Post
                Running a BSD kernel on top of the Mach kernel is anything but ideal for maximizing performance and minimizing latency. Then again, neither of those two are the reason why mac users use macOS.
                It seems you have no clue. macOS kernel is utter piece of shit in probably every aspect. Its graphic performance is also terrible. It's damn slow, insecure, far from being modern. It's a joke OS.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post

                  It seems you have no clue. macOS kernel is utter piece of shit in probably every aspect. Its graphic performance is also terrible. It's damn slow, insecure, far from being modern. It's a joke OS.
                  Jealousy, it is far better and more stable to use than "put random name desktop environement" on "put random guy name OS"

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post

                    It seems you have no clue. macOS kernel is utter piece of shit in probably every aspect. Its graphic performance is also terrible. It's damn slow, insecure, far from being modern. It's a joke OS.
                    Care to elaborate?

                    Edit: Really had to restrain myself to stop myself from mentioning that graphics performance is great under Metal on my system. Now, I have failed and fed the trolls. Bracing myself for the expected "Apple must die" echo 😂
                    Last edited by GruenSein; 06-12-2017, 05:47 PM.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X