Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Clear Linux Offering Performance Advantages Even With Low-Power IoT/Edge Hardware

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

  • betam4x
    replied
    I was not aware there were SFF PCs built on Celeron chips. I assume that from the picture of it they are not the same form factor as raspberry pie. That's what Intel really should focus on. It can be hard to find cases and accessories for proprietary devices. I would love to get my hands on one of those devices. Install a skeleton Windows install and you suddenly have a great little SFF PC.

    Leave a comment:


  • ms178
    replied
    Originally posted by mao_dze_dun View Post
    Wish they would do a more idiot friendly version of Clear Linux. This definitely seems like something I'd consider for my wife's laptop (N3450 and 4GB of RAM). Anybody know how much of their optimization finds its way on Solus. I've it installed on my desktop, but I'm guessing I'd see more gain on a low powered system.

    Edit: Just to clarify, when I say "idiot", I refer to myself, not my wife
    Aye, that was also my impression from my testing. Solus was a great start but their team is too small and the burden to keep the distro up-to-date seems to be a bit too high for them (at least at the time when their lead developer left the project). As you and others already pointed out Clear Linux needs way more polish and commonly used software to become a great desktop distro. But I very much welcome their philosophy to bring a performance-optimized distro to the market.

    By the way, I hope your wife did not read the unedited post.

    Leave a comment:


  • mao_dze_dun
    replied
    Wish they would do a more idiot friendly version of Clear Linux. This definitely seems like something I'd consider for my wife's laptop (N3450 and 4GB of RAM). Anybody know how much of their optimization finds its way on Solus. I've it installed on my desktop, but I'm guessing I'd see more gain on a low powered system.

    Edit: Just to clarify, when I say "idiot", I refer to myself, not my wife
    Last edited by mao_dze_dun; 31 August 2019, 06:10 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • coder
    replied
    Originally posted by ms178 View Post
    I hope we will get to see a shootout between Ryzen 3000 and Intel on Clear Linux before the new Threadripper comes out. The RDRAND issues should be gone by now which were holding back that testing earlier... I'd love to see if we see even more profound performance from the new Ryzen due to their better AVX2 support with that generation. It seems Clear Linux could leverage it better than other distros.
    Ugh. My first reply is awaiting moderation, but anyway consider:

    The MKL (Math Kernel Library) has both a discriminating and a non-discriminating CPU dispatcher (__intel_mkl_features_init and __intel_mkl_features_init_x, respectively).
    The "discriminating" one will only run optimized code on Genuine Intel CPUs. This needs to be patched, for AMD hardware to have a fair shot on Clear Linux. Or to run MKL on it, anywhere.

    Source: https://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=979&v=t

    Leave a comment:


  • coder
    replied
    Originally posted by ms178 View Post
    I hope we will get to see a shootout between Ryzen 3000 and Intel on Clear Linux before the new Threadripper comes out. The RDRAND issues should be gone by now which were holding back that testing earlier... I'd love to see if we see even more profound performance from the new Ryzen due to their better AVX2 support with that generation. It seems Clear Linux could leverage it better than other distros.
    Better apply this, first. Intel is still cheating.

    https://github.com/tpn/agner/blob/ma...patchpatch.txt

    Leave a comment:


  • sunnyflunk
    replied
    Originally posted by willmore View Post
    That LAME result seems very strange. Most of LAME on x86 is already hand coded ASM. Short of the other two distros disabling it, I'm shocked that there's that much improvement to be had. Unless they're using unsafe compiler settings that are leaving out important chunks of code. Which vendors have done in the past for a number of SPEC codes.
    I believe it's building lame without optimizations on other platforms due to not exporting CFLAGS to the environment (and it not having some -O1/2 default). CL does export CFLAGS to the environment and those are used in the build.

    A quick test with different CFLAGS:
    -O0 29.5s
    -O1 10.9s
    -O2 10.4s
    -O3 9.8s
    CL FLAGS 9.6s

    This has no bearing on the performance of what each distribution ships with as many PTS tests don't even use the distribution packages. So you're essentially comparing a -O0 build of lame on other distros (which isn't what they ship) with a CFLAG heavy build on CL (which then significant impact on the geometric mean of tests difference).

    It's very difficult to determine performance of distro's using the PTS as you have to understand every test to draw any conclusion. This goes both ways and often understates the performance of CL. For example, the flac test likely compiles a '-O2 -march=native' optimized build of flac for other distros. In CL that is similar to the distro build with AVX2/AVX512 optimized builds included. However, the performance of Ubuntu and others would be overstated with the distro package performing worse.

    Leave a comment:


  • ms178
    replied
    I hope we will get to see a shootout between Ryzen 3000 and Intel on Clear Linux before the new Threadripper comes out. The RDRAND issues should be gone by now which were holding back that testing earlier... I'd love to see if we see even more profound performance from the new Ryzen due to their better AVX2 support with that generation. It seems Clear Linux could leverage it better than other distros.

    Leave a comment:


  • paulcarroty
    replied
    I've used this distro couple for weeks and can share my experience.

    pros:
    - very fast, it feels like after upgrade to fresh i7.
    - active community: you'll get help on their forum from CL Team
    - compiler/most devtools already patched


    cons:
    - small number of available packages. Chromium? VS Code? VirtualBox? Go install/compile them yourself.
    - no ffmpeg/gstreamer/proprietary codecs and no way to install them easily
    - all workflow is highly patched/customised. RPM, but not fully compatible with Fedora/SUSE, some macros doesn't works.
    - stateless, many apps configured to use /usr/share/etc instead /etc.

    Conclusion: not ready yet, good only if you're fan of coding/compilation/patching or doesn't use nothing except browser and text editor.

    Leave a comment:


  • ferry
    replied
    I am not that surprised. I would expect on Goldmont (Atom) there are more opportunities for compile time improvement then on Core.

    Leave a comment:


  • S.Pam
    replied
    Is the resulting MP3 identical on Clear as the others? If so it seems very impressive.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X