Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Five-Way Linux Distribution Comparison In 2010

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

  • LinuxID10T
    replied
    Originally posted by zeb_ View Post
    I just realised the test under Mandriva cooker and Arch. Kernel is 2.6.34, my CPU is a i7 860, both are 64-bit environment.

    Mandriva: Average: 71.40 Frames Per Second
    Archlinux: Average: 72.74 Frames Per Second

    I have not tested Suse yet, but I see no significant difference between Mandriva cooker (development, now in freeze for the 2010.1 version) and Arch, although their schedulers are different (charge on each core is different on both OSes, as shown by gkrellm). Note that the kernel on my Arch machine is a 2.6.34 (the current one) as opposed to the 2.6.33 from the Phoronix test. I don't know if that would be the explanation.
    Due to margin of error, I don't think your results really count to call anything a regression.

    Leave a comment:


  • zeb_
    replied
    Was there a known regression in 2.6.33 ? at least, I know that for 2.6.34, the CFQ scheduler was improved.
    What Phoronix should do is to update Arch to the latest version and see if the regression disappears. That are things like that that would transform a poor article into something interesting: instead of creating a flame war, they could be informative and useful for ALL users and distros (like they did when dissecting the ext4 regressions in the kernel)..

    Leave a comment:


  • zeb_
    replied
    Originally posted by sundown View Post
    So? How is it going?
    I just realised the test under Mandriva cooker and Arch. Kernel is 2.6.34, my CPU is a i7 860, both are 64-bit environment.

    Mandriva: Average: 71.40 Frames Per Second
    Archlinux: Average: 72.74 Frames Per Second

    I have not tested Suse yet, but I see no significant difference between Mandriva cooker (development, now in freeze for the 2010.1 version) and Arch, although their schedulers are different (charge on each core is different on both OSes, as shown by gkrellm). Note that the kernel on my Arch machine is a 2.6.34 (the current one) as opposed to the 2.6.33 from the Phoronix test. I don't know if that would be the explanation.

    Leave a comment:


  • sundown
    replied
    Originally posted by zeb_ View Post
    Indeed. I can try x264 tonight, I have an Arch install on a 64-bit machine (core i7 860), a Mandriva cooker x86_64 (both kernels have not the same schedulers) and a livecd of Suse 64 bits.
    So? How is it going?

    Leave a comment:


  • xir_
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael View Post
    Actually it's an idea that Matthew Tippett and I had talked about a few months before, but there didn't seem to be too much community interest. I will think about it this weekend to see what could be done.
    great minds and all that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael
    replied
    Originally posted by xir_ View Post
    I messaged Michael with the idea, hopefully he will respond.
    Actually it's an idea that Matthew Tippett and I had talked about a few months before, but there didn't seem to be too much community interest. I will think about it this weekend to see what could be done.

    Leave a comment:


  • xir_
    replied
    Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    But yea, the idea of Linux Olympics is rather interesting indeed
    I messaged Michael with the idea, hopefully he will respond.

    Leave a comment:


  • GreatEmerald
    replied
    One slight, but obvious mistake in the article:
    With our first Bullet Physics Engine test, Arch Linux came out ahead of the four other Linux distributions but it was only faster by the slowest distribution in this test (openSUSE 11.3 RC1) by 5%. The other four Linux distributions performed close to the same speed.
    Looking at the graph it's obvious that it's Ubuntu 10.04 that is the slowest and not OpenSUSE.

    About all the flame wars: when pressing the "comments and discussion" button, I always think: "so, why is this test invalid?" And I always get an answer. So I believe that it's not the tests, but the public that are having issues here.

    But yea, the idea of Linux Olympics is rather interesting indeed

    Leave a comment:


  • Ex-Cyber
    replied
    I'd just like to take this opportunity to say that I think Arch is okay.

    Leave a comment:


  • kraftman
    replied
    @Mr Elendig

    Don't waste your time speaking to an idiot flaming with another one. It's probably some kind of way to feel better or to have a good time for a moment. The one mentioned his lovely Novell, because it produces his lovely mono and another one shows his anti Linux attitude as always.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X