If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Ah, okay. It would be nice if the information on software versions was contained in some sort of a table because I am having trouble deciphering it in its current format.
It is difficult to make heads or tails of these results to know exactly what is affecting each benchmark result.
I've been using the bfs scheduler in PCLinuxOS for a couple of months. I don't believe the scheduler is responsible for the speed in these tests. Latency and responsiveness is usually in competition with throughput. It does make things seem faster, though!
Ah, okay. It would be nice if the information on software versions was contained in some sort of a table because I am having trouble deciphering it in its current format.
It is difficult to make heads or tails of these results to know exactly what is affecting each benchmark result.
Woow,...I was thinking of trying PCLinuxOS for a long time,I newer imagined that it was that good.
Seriously,BFS killed all distros in these tests.Too bad that it doesn't use all newest packages .
I thought of the same. KMS and in case of UMS screen size matters as well.
If screen size was set bigger than current display resolution, it could cause worse performance (counts to UMS only).
It's very like KMS vs. UMS. Quake3(live) on a X1500 radeon is unplayable with KMS. With UMS i get 125FPS pretty much all the time....
If you boot with radeon.modeset=0 you can disable it, X/mesa should still work.
Would be nice if phoronix actually did a comparison between KMS/UMS, or just did a simple check if mandriva/pclinux has disabled KMS....).
Based on what people say about BFS it really shows that it has some benefits(like listening music and compiling something "without stuttering"),and performance gains.
Yes, it has advantages like performance gains in some things.
It's obvious that the whole reason why PCLOS won so many tests is not because of BFS that's why I said it's a shame that it doesn't use all latest things like other distros.But even without that anyone who knows that PCLOS is based on Mandriva and sees this tests can see why it's so god and can make some parallel between them.Based on what people say about BFS it really shows that it has some benefits(like listening music and compiling something "without stuttering"),and performance gains.
Works for you, doesn't work here. it's funny to read this, because you were laughing in another thread saying "works for me".
And yes, it didn't perform better in every test. That's true. I guess it sucks. It should have won them all, not just half of them. Lame.
And I guess all those PCLinuxOS users don't have keyboards and mice.
Seriously, some people...
So, half of those tests is thanks to BFS, not mesa, KMS etc? Maybe many PCLinuxOS users aren't affected? Yes, it will suck till it will be more stable. I recommend you to shut up, because what you said is idiotic. Seriously, some people are idiots. It sucks because it kills mouse and keyboard input not because it didn't won them all.
One thing missing from the article is which of the tested distros were running with KMS enabled and which ones weren't. I suspect this is were the performance difference in the OpenArena and Tremulous benchmarks comes from.
I thought of the same. KMS and in case of UMS screen size matters as well.
If screen size was set bigger than current display resolution, it could cause worse performance (counts to UMS only).
Leave a comment: