Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu 19.10 Beta Released - The Eoan Ermine Brings The Latest Linux Goods

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

  • Templar82
    replied
    Originally posted by Linuxxx View Post
    What sets Ubuntu really apart from all the other distros out there is that they give one the option of a low-latency desktop via the "lowlatency" kernel package (1000 Hz + PREEMPT + IRQ threading).

    Here's what some of the other distris are doing:

    Fedora: 1000 Hz, but no PREEMPT

    openSUSE: 250 Hz & had PREEMPT until 4.20, but then silently disabled it for Linux 5.0.

    Debian: 250 Hz & no PREEMPT (Ubuntu's standard "generic" kernel is based on this).

    Arch / Manjaro: 300 Hz + PREEMPT

    Therefore, Ubuntu really does offer a unique Linux kernel configuration not available anywhere else!
    Are there benchmarkable differences with these or is it mostly a "feel" thing?

    I didn't realise there was so much variety between distros.

    Leave a comment:


  • Linuxxx
    replied
    Originally posted by hax0r View Post
    Hmm now that you mention this it wouldn't be a bad idea to spend a nice evening testing 19.10 beta with Ubuntu's lowlatency kernel and tuned-adm's low-latency-performance predefined profile...now that GNOME 3.34's UI is smoother than ever before it could be interesting.


    https://access.redhat.com/sites/defa...rhel7-v1.1.pdf (RHEL Low Latency Performance Tuning)
    I took a look at the RHEL "tuned" tuning guide You posted and for me the key takeaway was this:
    5.3 What about cpuspeed?
    The cpuspeed service from Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 and Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 has
    been replaced in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 by the cpupower service. The cpupower
    service also conflicts with the tuned service in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 (because both
    adjust power management settings). tuned must be disabled in order to use cpuspeed, and
    vice-versa. tuned profiles provide the building blocks necessary to approximate
    cpuspeed/cpupower functionality.
    Therefore I still prefer just using "cpupower" rather than "tuned" [which is far more complex] to set the intel_pstate performance governor & intel perf-bias 0 (zero) upon boot for maximum performance, which automatically also leads to lowest latency times with the "lowlatency" kernel.

    Anyway, are You using "tuned" Yourself?
    If so, what settings are You, well, setting?

    Leave a comment:


  • Linuxxx
    replied
    Originally posted by betam4x View Post
    Uthose of you discussing the lowlatency kernel either don't have NVIDIA cards or haven't tried the kernel: it isn't compatible with the proprietary drivers.

    I have used many distros over the years, but I have found Arch to give the best performance in gaming and content editing workloads.
    You obviously are mixing up 'soft' real-time with 'hard' real-time!
    Because NVIDIA's binary driver does work with Ubuntu's "lowlatency" kernel (I use it myself).
    You probably tried out Manjaro's "RT" kernel, which is 'hard' real-time and not recommended for general use.

    So, go ahead & try out Ubuntu's "lowlatency" kernel, as I have found it more responsive than Arch/Manjaro's default kernel.

    Leave a comment:


  • tildearrow
    replied
    Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post
    This must hopefully explain the JACK XRuns when using a buffer size of 128.
    Oh dang it Arch team, you really tricked me with that one.

    Leave a comment:


  • CKing123
    replied
    Unfortunately, the beta does not seem to have ZFS support. I tried it in the VM using manual partitioning, but did not see any option for ZFS

    Leave a comment:


  • betam4x
    replied
    Uthose of you discussing the lowlatency kernel either don't have NVIDIA cards or haven't tried the kernel: it isn't compatible with the proprietary drivers.

    I have used many distros over the years, but I have found Arch to give the best performance in gaming and content editing workloads.

    Leave a comment:


  • skeevy420
    replied
    Originally posted by tildearrow View Post

    What? I thought Arch used 1000Hz?
    It's 300.

    Leave a comment:


  • hax0r
    replied
    Originally posted by Linuxxx View Post
    option of a low-latency desktop via the "lowlatency" kernel package (1000 Hz + PREEMPT + IRQ threading).
    Hmm now that you mention this it wouldn't be a bad idea to spend a nice evening testing 19.10 beta with Ubuntu's lowlatency kernel and tuned-adm's low-latency-performance predefined profile...now that GNOME 3.34's UI is smoother than ever before it could be interesting.


    https://access.redhat.com/sites/defa...rhel7-v1.1.pdf (RHEL Low Latency Performance Tuning)

    Leave a comment:


  • tildearrow
    replied
    Originally posted by Linuxxx View Post
    Arch / Manjaro: 300 Hz + PREEMPT
    What? I thought Arch used 1000Hz?

    Leave a comment:


  • skeevy420
    replied
    Linuxxx
    In defense of Manjaro, they provide a bunch of kernels and extra modules that next to no other distributions provide in such a variety.

    In defense of both Arch and Manjaro, they don't necessarily have to provide in the repositories what's offered in the AUR.

    Other distributions where you have to either do it manually or use 3rd party repositories, yeah, I'm with you there. Some of those distributions don't really make the do it manually part very easy. Put me on something on like Arch, Void, or even Gentoo and I'm just fine doing crazy stuff because they're designed to make that easy; put me on something like Suse and it makes me feel like I'm retarded...It's like, "No, Suse, I don't want the OBS, I want to rebuild this crap locally with march=native and your documentation is not helping me at all ".
    Last edited by skeevy420; 27 September 2019, 01:05 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X