Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Windows 10 vs. Eight Linux Distributions On The Threadripper 3970X

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

  • Windows 10 vs. Eight Linux Distributions On The Threadripper 3970X

    Phoronix: Windows 10 vs. Eight Linux Distributions On The Threadripper 3970X

    Motivated by last week's Windows vs. Linux benchmarks with the 128-thread AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X here are Windows 10 Pro and Enterprise benchmarks on the 32-core / 64-thread AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X up against eight Linux distributions.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=28890

  • #2
    Does a Spigot server approximate the workload performed in the H2 test? If so, I will think of switching to Windows if I buy this processor.

    Oh no, Windows beating Linux at x264... Does this mean I have to set it up as a Windows machine and keep using my current Linux one and transfer 4K frames at 60fps over 25GbE using RDMA and find a way to mount my XFS drive on Windows to enjoy that FPS boost?
    Last edited by tildearrow; 17 February 2020, 03:51 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Was there something up with Manjaro? Because when it lost, it really lost.

      Comment


      • #4
        It would be really cool to see Solus again in benchmarks. It is meant to be run completely stock, without need of PPAs, custom kernels or any user intervention, and it borrows some things from Clear Linux, so it would be cool to see how it stacks up, how good the defaults are.

        Comment


        • #5
          Am I the only one who thinks that those last and first place finishers are completely irrelevant?

          Comment


          • #6
            why manjaro is slowest ?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Aryma View Post
              why manjaro is slowest ?
              Because it's using bleeding edge everything without the optimizations that Clear Linux creates specifically to win benchmark tests.

              Older packages, like those used by CentOS, are faster because they have seen more performance updates and aren't stumbling over the regressions introduced by bleeding edge packages.

              Comment


              • #8
                Also, Arch packages tend to be full-fat, everything enabled and built. Larger executable code means cache misses are more likely, hurting performance. You can see the opposite effect with musl-built distros- more code in cache offering a performance bump on low cache systems.

                Comment


                • #9
                  intel: The difference between xx70 and xx90 CPU is +200 Mhz.
                  AMD: The difference between xx70 and xx90 CPU is +200 Mhz. And 32 more cores.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by andyprough View Post

                    Because it's using bleeding edge everything without the optimizations that Clear Linux creates specifically to win benchmark tests.

                    Older packages, like those used by CentOS, are faster because they have seen more performance updates and aren't stumbling over the regressions introduced by bleeding edge packages.
                    That doesn't explain Tumbleweed using really similar package versions, some newer like the kernel, and having better results. Doing a quick glace at the table, I think it's because they're using GCC 9.2.0 and all the rest of the newer ones are using GCC 9.2.1...Manjaro is the odd one out with 9.2.0.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X