Initial Benchmarks Of Fedora 32 Linux Performance

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Initial Benchmarks Of Fedora 32 Linux Performance

Fedora 32 isn't making it out this week due to last minute blocker bugs but should hopefully surface next week. In any case, here are some initial benchmarks looking at the performance of Fedora 32 in its effectively final state compared to Fedora 31 for seeing how the performance has shifted with its plethora of updates.

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=29106

[treba]

Hm, sad to see firefox performance and boot time regress :/ I expected both to rather get better.

On the firefox site I *think* LTO or PGO was disabled again at some point. Need to check what's wrong with the boot time - taking 3s more is not trivial and it was already worse than ubuntu before.

There was some discussion last year in this thread about it: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/arch...GGZUFTZ7JTWI5/

[Volta]

What regressed the most are wallpapers. The new ones are just awful. However, it's nice to see performance improvements. Except mentioned Firefox and boot time.

[blacknova]

I don't particular care about wallpapers, the only time I see them is just after reboot. Other than that it would be interesting to see what have been broken in this release from the start and missed QA.

[q2dg]

What I liked most what "Terraform-green.png" (or yellow) wallpaper. I don't know why it isn't currenly available in official packages :-(

[andyprough]

Second picture doesn't look bad, although the icon placement is poor. I thought Gnome didn't allow desktop icons? The first wallpaper is downright unhealthy to look at for any period of time. Slower boot times are normally an unpardonable offense, but 14 seconds is still acceptable.

[skeevy420]

What regressed the most are wallpapers. The new ones are just awful. However, it's nice to see performance improvements. Except mentioned Firefox and boot time.

I liked em....at least the ones that came with Silverblue. If you want horrible wallpapers and themes...run Manjaro...ugh...

Gave Silverblue a shot during the end of 31 and the start of the 32 cycle followed by giving the actual 32 beta a shot and I don't really have much to say one way or the other about Fedora.

By that I mean that at the end of the day Fedora didn't really offer anything special over other distributions to make me want to really sit down and become a Fedora user. Silverblue almost did. I'll have to check SB out in another year, maybe earlier, and see if my little peeves and annoyances are fixed....Flat printing and the BTRFS installer bug mainly....

Nothing bad or wrong with Fedora. Nothing that stands out or shines either. If a person just wants to sit down and use a system it makes a fine OS. When a person starts looking at more advanced features, Fedora becomes less appealing.

Dear Fedora Devs,

Y'all should consider giving us an installer with Stratis Root support. Giving Fedora a Stratis Root option would give y'all a killer feature no one else is doing so y'all can compete with Ubuntu+ZFS and SUSE+BTRFS in the advanced file system market. Based on posts I've seen in the past year, a lot of us seem to have confidence issues with Stratis since it doesn't seem to be being pushed anywhere outside of extra storage pools for RHEL. Throwing the community a bone like that would increase access and testing for Stratis, give Fedora a unique feature that no other distribution is doing, and we'd have more confidence with using Stratis for our projects since it would be more readily available.

As an end-user, about your only standout, killer feature that I see from Fedora is Silverblue and, well, Netflix and Hulu and RPM-Fusion and Firefox can be a real pain in the ass to get all running swimmingly. Just saying that SB needs Mom-Easy Netflix if y'all want the masses to adopt it....and printers working from Flatpaks....but, in the meantime, an actual OS with Stratis root would be nice to have.

Thanks for taking the time to read this and know that I'm not trying to complain; just trying to give honest feedback.

[skeevy420]

Second picture doesn't look bad, although the icon placement is poor. I thought Gnome didn't allow desktop icons? The first wallpaper is downright unhealthy to look at for any period of time. Slower boot times are normally an unpardonable offense, but 14 seconds is still acceptable.

There weren't any desktop icons. First pic was the Dock. Second pic is part of the Activities Overview.

[Britoid]

I liked em....at least the ones that came with Silverblue. If you want horrible wallpapers and themes...run Manjaro...ugh...

Gave Silverblue a shot during the end of 31 and the start of the 32 cycle followed by giving the actual 32 beta a shot and I don't really have much to say one way or the other about Fedora.

By that I mean that at the end of the day Fedora didn't really offer anything special over other distributions to make me want to really sit down and become a Fedora user. Silverblue almost did. I'll have to check SB out in another year, maybe earlier, and see if my little peeves and annoyances are fixed....Flat printing and the BTRFS installer bug mainly....

Nothing bad or wrong with Fedora. Nothing that stands out or shines either. If a person just wants to sit down and use a system it makes a fine OS. When a person starts looking at more advanced features, Fedora becomes less appealing.

Dear Fedora Devs,

Y'all should consider giving us an installer with Stratis Root support. Giving Fedora a Stratis Root option would give y'all a killer feature no one else is doing so y'all can compete with Ubuntu+ZFS and SUSE+BTRFS in the advanced file system market. Based on posts I've seen in the past year, a lot of us seem to have confidence issues with Stratis since it doesn't seem to be being pushed anywhere outside of extra storage pools for RHEL. Throwing the community a bone like that would increase access and testing for Stratis, give Fedora a unique feature that no other distribution is doing, and we'd have more confidence with using Stratis for our projects since it would be more readily available.

As an end-user, about your only standout, killer feature that I see from Fedora is Silverblue and, well, Netflix and Hulu and RPM-Fusion and Firefox can be a real pain in the ass to get all running swimmingly. Just saying that SB needs Mom-Easy Netflix if y'all want the masses to adopt it....and printers working from Flatpaks....but, in the meantime, an actual OS with Stratis root would be nice to have.

Thanks for taking the time to read this and know that I'm not trying to complain; just trying to give honest feedback.

Codecs are a legal issue. Fedora can't legally ship H264 codecs and unlike Ubuntu it's not based in a tax haven without software patents.

Fedora is good if you want an up to date desktop (none of this crappy old package stuff) that uses next-generation software. Putting filesystem to the side for now (XFS really should be default though on Workstation imho), you've got the distro that constantly showcases and pushes new open-source technologies such as Wayland, OStree, Flatpak, firewalld, Pipewire, systemd (not really new I guess now) and more. The only other distro you get this with is Tumbleweed and Arch.

But another thing is Fedora's "upstream first" policy. To improve Fedora, the idea is to improve upstream, which does benefit all distros. Things like Plymouth are Fedora features.

[ix900]

What regressed the most are wallpapers. The new ones are just awful. However, it's nice to see performance improvements. Except mentioned Firefox and boot time.

99.9% of the time on everything, wallpapers are horrible. Its rare to see anything with one worth using.