100+ Benchmarks Between Clear Linux vs. Arch-Based Manjaro Linux - Summer 2019 Tests

[Teggs]

Why Manjaroooooooo?... There's a bunch of True Arch installing scripts out there...

Ah! The No True Archman fallacy.

*nods head sagely*

[fkoehler]

Really nice new graphing feature, Michael.
Regarding the graph being rather long: It's obviously possible to group benchmarks into "benchmark groups" and it's equally obvious, that there will be argreement with the concept in general but people will not be content with the choice of groupings in particular )

[flux242]

Here is the missing conclusion: if you'd plan to do lots of sequential writes you'd better go with manjaro. But if you'd want to do lots of mp3 you'd better go with the clear linux. That is

[GdeR]

Why Manjaroooooooo?... There's a bunch of True Arch installing scripts out there...

People like you made me want to stay away from Arch. The Arch community is full of childish bigoted zealots, hidden behind a nice Wiki.

[GdeR]

So, basically Clear Linux is the highly performant distro that everybody wants, but nobody can use.. yet. Nice, another point of frustration for Linux on desktop.

[kaprikawn]

At least in the case of LAME MP3 encoding, which is showing the biggest difference, it is most likely being compiled without optimizations on Manjaro and with -O3 on Clear Linux ⟹ Avoid making conclusions about the relative performance of the tested systems based on these unreliable results.

If what you get on Manjaro is compiled without optimizations and what you get on Clear Linux is compiled with -O3 then the results are valid. What would be the point in installing a distro, then building everything from source? If you go down that road, everything Michael does is pointless unless it's on an LFS system.

[kaprikawn]

People like you made me want to stay away from Arch. The Arch community is full of childish bigoted zealots, hidden behind a nice Wiki.

I don't think the Arch community is that bad really. There's plenty of RTFM in the forums, but they usually post a link to the part of the wiki they mean. Personally, if I get a snarky answer that fixes my problem I'm happy.

[GdeR]

I don't think the Arch community is that bad really. There's plenty of RTFM in the forums, but they usually post a link to the part of the wiki they mean. Personally, if I get a snarky answer that fixes my problem I'm happy.

To be honest, I would be happy as well. I was referring to the general attitude on the social media. If you find someone who's hijacking other people's threads just to impose their view on what is best for the OP.. 8 times out of 10, it's a Arch user who has no idea how to solve the original problem, but he suggests the OP to switch to Arch no matter what. I'm pretty aware that not all Arch users are like that, which is reasonable to assume even under the least favourable statistical hypothesis, but that says something about the average userbase. On a deeper analysis, I would say it is even understandable. Usually, those who like the new stuff, the new features, the most customizable graphics, etc.. are indeed the young people, by definition I would say. And among all the Linux distributions, Arch is the one perfectly suitable for that kind of crowd. However they sometimes, like most young fellas out there, lack the necessary common sense to realize that not everyone has the same needs. So.. eventually I moved on.. partly because I myself didn't need Arch anymore, partly because I'm not that young anymore.

[ms178]

Last time I checked Clear Linux, it needs way more polish for mainstream desktop usage (exfat, unrar and other helpful packages were missing). Also Chromium with VAAPI patches applied is a must-have and wasn't available at that time. The new installer was nice to work with so hopefully they are moving in the right direction.

[Termy]

Interesting to see manjaro in front at IO - that would be the last area i would expect clear linux to lose out xD

And for the graph: i REALLY like it - excellent way to have an overview in a 1on1-benchmark!