Ubuntu 10.04 Is Off To A Poor Performance Start

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • phoronix
    Administrator
    • Jan 2007
    • 67121

    Ubuntu 10.04 Is Off To A Poor Performance Start

    Phoronix: Ubuntu 10.04 Is Off To A Poor Performance Start

    Tomorrow will mark the first alpha release of Ubuntu 10.04, and while there is still a long journey ahead for this Long-Term Support release before it officially makes its debut in April, we could not pass up the opportunity to provide some early benchmarks of the Lucid Lynx. Ubuntu 10.04 LTS has already pulled in X.Org 7.5 with X Server 1.7 and other updated graphics packages along with the Linux 2.6.32 kernel that it will be using in the final build, which already presents some core differences from the current stable release, Ubuntu 9.10.

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite
  • FireBurn
    Senior Member
    • Dec 2007
    • 2126

    #2
    Can someone check to see if Ubuntu uses debugging packages in their pre-releases? Distros used to build them to spot more bugs but they used to run slower

    Comment

    • Ian_Corne
      Junior Member
      • Dec 2009
      • 1

      #3
      At least the notifications use debugging

      Comment

      • xav_19
        Junior Member
        • Nov 2009
        • 12

        #4
        CFQ

        A lot of this benchmarks are server oriented, maybe the patch which make CFQ more responsive for desktop has something to do with that (see http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7637/?ut...ntent=Netvibes)

        Comment

        • d2kx
          Senior Member
          • Jan 2007
          • 2311

          #5
          At the moment, lucid has an old xf86-video-ati snapshot which is way slower than current git with KMS (and they're using KMS!). Also, Mesa will hopefully be updated to 7.7.

          Comment

          • jackflap
            Junior Member
            • Feb 2008
            • 18

            #6
            Benchmarking 10.04 alpha 1? Jeez, you guys must be bored..

            How about getting that Win7 build finished so we can finally see those Ubuntu/Mac/Win7 comparisons already??

            Comment

            • garytr24
              Phoronix Member
              • Jan 2009
              • 88

              #7
              ubuntu debug packages

              I think all packages are debug packages that are then stripped. This extra information is then available in a -dbgsym package. I don't think there are any changes for beta/release time. I know this to be the case as I've submitted crash reports that use these extra packages to give a good stack trace during a crash.

              Comment

              • V!NCENT
                Senior Member
                • Aug 2009
                • 2226

                #8
                Originally posted by jackflap View Post
                Benchmarking 10.04 alpha 1? Jeez, you guys must be bored..
                I'd rather have some info than no info at all, but it is indeed a bit pointless.

                However news always had a function. For example: political climate. If the news pais attention to something than the government will notice it.

                Now let's look at these Aplha 1 benchmarks. It may highlight a problem that Ubuntu devs may come aware of so that they can fix it. We have X.org and Debian people visiting Phoronix. For them this news could be useful so we, as end users, may profit from it on the long run

                Comment

                • hax0r
                  Senior Member
                  • Jan 2009
                  • 447

                  #9
                  Originally posted by jackflap View Post
                  Benchmarking 10.04 alpha 1? Jeez, you guys must be bored..

                  How about getting that Win7 build finished so we can finally see those Ubuntu/Mac/Win7 comparisons already??
                  And why not benchmark alpha? It's not like the final release will run 3x faster, the numbers pretty much reflect actual performance that likely will not change.

                  Who is exactly affected by ext4 bug? I'm using "data=writeback,noatime,nodiratime" options.

                  Comment

                  • V!NCENT
                    Senior Member
                    • Aug 2009
                    • 2226

                    #10
                    Originally posted by hax0r View Post
                    Who is exactly affected by ext4 bug? I'm using "data=writeback,noatime,nodiratime" options.
                    Wasn't it the 'check a thousand times to see if the file has been written correctly'-'feature' that you could turn of with a flag?

                    And who uses ext4 anyway? XFS is so much better in terms of speed and given the fact that it is journaling makes it enough for me to use anyway...

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X