macOS 10.13 High Sierra vs. Ubuntu Linux Performance

[Sloth]

I would be surprised if they didn't, they clearly stated that they are "optimizing it for flash storage" and F2FS filesystem ram-caches aggressively too.

Pretty big difference between aggressively caching and suppressing fsync.

[ZeroPointEnergy]

MacOS got kicked into the balls in a home match. Kinda surprising it does such a bad job considering the OS only has to support a tiny fraction of the hardware Linux supports.

[starshipeleven]

Pretty big difference between aggressively caching and suppressing fsync.

suppressing fsync is the logical next step after aggressive caching if you want to be REALLY sure to get the best responsiveness possible, fuck everything else. What users really run large databases on MacOS anyway?

[Apopas]

So for everything that isn't IO bottlenecked and hits the CPU hard, Ubuntu is the clear winner across the board. For everything that is IO bottlenecked or java bottlenecked it's mix up.

What else did you expect?

[Apopas]

Good old OSX... Since 2009 I joined this site, I remember it to be slow as molasses. In every benchmark the same situation. And if you consider that it is special optimized for the ultra expensive hardware it runs at, it makes the situation truly pathetic. And yes, I know, OSX guys do not care about performance... Never... All they want to be happy is to use Photoshop because every single one is an artist and to sync their iphones via iTunes...

[dante]

The sqlite numbers on APFS make me really curious about whether they are skipping fsync().

MacOS always beated Linux on Postgresql benchmarks , let's see this new one

[labyrinth153]

what a kick ... Ubuntu has given to MacOS! hahaha

You are very ignorant. It was close if anything. This is quite literally a free improvement going to apfs. Migrate filesystem, catch up to the performant Linux.

[Exordium01]

You are very ignorant. It was close if anything. This is quite literally a free improvement going to apfs. Migrate filesystem, catch up to the performant Linux.

It's frustrating how often the comments section here devolves into blatant fanboy/tribalism. Half this thread is OS X bashing by people who apparently haven't read the article. The apparent inability to have a reasonable discussion is the primary reason why I haven't subscribed yet.

The articles on specific graphics vendors are no different.

[labyrinth153]

I happen to be in the unique position where I like just about every os. It makes it really annoying to see extremist bashing anything.

[Exordium01]

Good old OSX... Since 2009 I joined this site, I remember it to be slow as molasses. In every benchmark the same situation. And if you consider that it is special optimized for the ultra expensive hardware it runs at, it makes the situation truly pathetic. And yes, I know, OSX guys do not care about performance... Never... All they want to be happy is to use Photoshop because every single one is an artist and to sync their iphones via iTunes...

Right. They don't care about performance at all. Aside from forking KHTML and turning it into a world class web browser, developing Clang and many other open source projects, designing the fastest mobile SoC etc. They don't care about performance at all.

You're free to prefer any OS you'd like, but if you need to invent bullshit in order to rationalize your decision, you have a problem.