Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Arch Linux, Clear Linux, Fedora Compete On The ASUS ROG Strix G15

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

  • cmaciej
    replied
    I use Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA401QM with Fedora 34. The guide on asus-linux.org asks for blacklisting kernel packages and install kernel from their copr repo. I think these kernels have patches for enabling specific features of Asus ROG laptops. I wonder if there is any performance difference though.

    Leave a comment:


  • caligula
    replied
    Originally posted by andyprough View Post
    I'm surprised Clear didn't do a lot better. Those are three of the consistently worst performing distros that you put it up against. You used to get really strong results from Debian, but it seems like you've stopped testing it in these multi-distro competitions.
    What makes you think Debian's 4.19.37 kernel would even boot when you installed it on a Ryzen 5000 series system?

    Leave a comment:


  • CochainComplex
    replied
    Originally posted by birdie View Post

    Supports or enables by default? Because Fedora runs with SeLinux enabled by default and Michael does not disable it. Speaking of GCC flags, are you sure Arch comes close to this?

    -Wall -W -Wextra -Wstrict-prototypes -O2 -flto=auto -ffat-lto-objects -fexceptions -g -grecord-gcc-switches -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -fstack-protector-strong -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -fcf-protection -fPIC -DPIC

    Clear Linux uses -O3 by default which makes binaries fatter without necessarily making them faster. Its default GCC options (/share/defaults/etc/profile):

    -g -O3 -feliminate-unused-debug-types -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=32 -Wformat -Wformat-security -m64 -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -Wp,-D_REENTRANT -ftree-loop-distribute-patterns -Wl,-z -Wl,now -Wl,-z -Wl,relro -fno-semantic-interposition -ffat-lto-objects -fno-trapping-math -Wl,-sort-common -Wl,--enable-new-dtags -mtune=skylake -Wa,-mbranches-within-32B-boundaries

    So, it's -O3 -mtune=skylake -fstack-protector vs. Fedora's -O2 -mtune=generic -fstack-protector-strong -fstack-clash-protection -fcf-protection

    There's no magic in Clear Linux which other distros cannot copy. I wonder why people continue to praise Clear Linux' performance in every test without taking ten minutes to find out what actually makes it faster.
    Your statement is quite correct. But you are missing a small detail. The mentioned flags are default true but clear Linux uses autospec for building their pkgs. So each package has its own specfile *.spec can be found in the individual repo. Which adds or removes several flags. So one could say that each package has its handtuned flagset.
    This flagfile does also branch built processes for different CPUs. Eg. Skylake-x avx512 enavled.
    Bottom line their is no hidden magic. But there is a lot of work put into it to figure out which flags are the best for individual pkgs. Besides they also add security related flags so it is no performance for security trade.

    Leave a comment:


  • Grinch
    replied
    Originally posted by birdie View Post
    There's no magic in Clear Linux which other distros cannot copy.
    True.

    Arch Linux is currently working on a new repository where they will serve packages compiled with x86-64-v3 as opposed to x86-64 which will enable registers and instructions found in later CPU's.

    IIRC the test they did on a range of packages yielded an overall 10% performance increase. I don't think they will switch from -O2 to -O3 though.

    Leave a comment:


  • dragonn
    replied
    Originally posted by MastaG View Post
    Still laptop vendors should send in their patches way more sooner.
    Hahahahahah thats a really good joke.
    I didn't see even one official patch from ASUS, everything comes from the community with does an amazing job.
    Maybe vendors send patches for some enterprise grade laptop but I never saw anything from ASUS/MSI/Lenovo for the avrage users/gaming laptops.

    Leave a comment:


  • linner
    replied
    It's weird how the results are kind of all over the place. In one test a distro will top the charts by a wide margin, then in others it's the slowest by a wide margin. Why is there no consistency? There is no clear winner if you ask me.

    Anecdotally I mostly use Ubuntu and Arch Linux and don't see much difference performance-wise. Fedora on the other hand is very noticeably more "clunky", slow, and bloated feeling comparatively. I guess maybe SELinux or their other defaults play a part in that. I've never used Clear Linux so I can't comment on that.

    What I'd like to see is a distro based around something like busybox (like embedded devices use). Something ultra-lightweight almost like booting a kernel straight to a shell. This would be really handy for server installs on constrained systems like cheap VPS instances. Would probably be great as a desktop as well. Boot times in a couple seconds, faster than ChromeOS even.

    Leave a comment:


  • BaumKuchen
    replied
    Originally posted by david-nk View Post
    It's frustrating that after several years, Clear Linux is still ahead of the rest.
    Why isn't upstream incorporating Intel's changes?
    Becuase support, compatibility, system stability, lot of testing etc etc etc.
    You don't wanna break a system running bank applications because of some unstable optimization.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dhoulmagus
    replied
    As a normal user instead of someone in a bank, I prefer performance over security.

    Leave a comment:


  • jrch2k8
    replied
    Originally posted by birdie View Post

    Again, SeLinux is enabled by default in Fedora. In Arch Linux it needs to be enabled. We are talking about two radically different things yet you equate them like there's no effing difference. Arch Linux may support all the MAC systems in the world, that doesn't make any bloody difference if none is enabled.

    Funny you've completely omitted -O3 vs -O2 and -mtune=generic vs -mtune=skylake

    Also I don't take lightly statements like "performance wise is quite low the impact" - either you test it and show the results or don't speak at all.

    As for GCC FMV it requires a lot of effort for a very dubious effect - it's extremely unlikely that the majority of tests that Michael runs benefit from it. Again, you need to show where and how Clear Linux enables this feature or we've got nothing to talk about. I don't take lightly vapid statement with no proofs. I've shown you the compilation flags, so far you've shared nothing but assumptions.

    Also, sir, I've caught you lying through your teeth.



    Current status in Arch Linux
    SELinux is not officially supported (see [1][2]).


    I've got a very bad taste in my mouth after discussing this issue with you. You're welcome to continue with other demagogues.
    Please get out of my sight.
    1.) here you can see generic vs skylake is about hardware features available if they are used on the code(or later on in the compiler) https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-1...ml#x86-Options

    1.b) -O3 basically is extra optimization passes for IPA and vectorization and performance is not affected if your code (or the compiler) don't use(is capable of later on) SIMD. https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-1...timize-Options

    2.) https://docs.01.org/clearlinux/lates...rials/fmv.html, https://github.com/clearlinux-pkgs/linux, https://github.com/clearlinux-pkgs/opencv some examples.

    3.) Nothing is officially supported on ArchLinux, sigh. same applies to Gentoo. See it as an expert distro(hence you are supposed to know what you are doing) and btw that is very old but is there as a newbie warning but works fine, same on Gentoo(as long as the ebuilds include selinux flags build from scratch ). So ok Fedora is idiot free and have a sane preinstalled default, Arch and Gentoo are not idiot free and require intervention but you have way more control over it.

    4.) Is ironic reading this from someone that don't even understand basic C/C++ or how Gentoo/Arch/etc works, etc. or what optimization passes do or even something as blatantly obvious as -march but whatever make you happy.

    Leave a comment:


  • andyprough
    replied
    Originally posted by birdie View Post
    There's no magic in Clear Linux which other distros cannot copy. I wonder why people continue to praise Clear Linux' performance in every test without taking ten minutes to find out what actually makes it faster.
    Clear Linux has always been a failure as a general purpose distro. Before they stopped their desktop Linux ambitions last year, a survey of Intel people showed that 94% of their own people refused to use it as a desktop. The reason other distros don't copy everything that Clear Linux does is that it does not all translate to good general desktop distro performance.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X