Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

15-Way Linux OS Comparison Shows Mixed High-Performing Linux Distributions

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

  • #11
    Why not Slackware, the original?

    Comment


    • #12
      Interesting results, there are clear differences to be seen, depending on the load. Well worth the time and effort to do this benchmarking.

      Thank +1000000 for including real-world Go benchmarks too, those figures are super useful. I must admit that I dont spend barely enough time playing thing like Xonotic .... but I do get to play a lot with Golang though.

      Thanks again.

      Comment


      • #13
        I'm sad that OpenSuse is nearly at last position in games benchmarks...

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by Sloth View Post
          Yeah that sqlite result is suspicious. There's so much variation that you really need to understand that in order to trust the rest of the testing.
          The obvious candidates are a) different versions of the library, and b) different compile-time options. It's possible, for example, that the slower distros have Sqlite compiled with options enabling much stricter data integrity checks, forcing flush to disk more often, that sort of thing. And we can see in the Go tests just how much difference you can have between old and new versions of a library...

          Comment


          • #15
            Yay for debian testing !! Been using it for over 5 years reliably !

            Comment


            • #16
              The old 14.04.4 Ubuntu doesn't do that shabby. However Clear OS is definitely showing a good trend, one that other distros can take a look into. Sabayon with Gentoo base doing that low is a great surprise.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by bvbfan View Post
                Debian Testing is rolling as Arch, nothing surprisingly
                That is incorrect. A fair comparison would be Debian Sid(unstable branch) and Arch. Debian Testing doesnt have the bleeding edge software but it is an image of what the next debian release is going to be. Software in Debian Testing is far more stable than in Debian Sid or the even more fresh Debian Experimental one.

                Here is the link

                https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/d...oosing.en.html.

                Debian Testing brings the best of both the worlds. Fast "latest" stable software.
                Last edited by sarfarazahmad; 10 March 2016, 04:29 AM.

                Comment


                • #18
                  I've been using Debian stable for years now. I built a new computer over the weekend, and (while waiting for more funds for a dedicated GPU), I borrowed my spouse's R9 285. Intending to run amdgpu, I tried recompiled the kernel, DDX and Mesa (after upgrading to the newer Clang/LLVM through the Clang repos), but Xorg would always crash on launch. The stack trace suggested a mix of the old and new Clang libraries was going on, and instead of spending even more hours trying to figure it out, I bit the bullet and upgraded to Debian Testing.

                  I was really worried it would be unpleasantly unstable and incompatible with all my various customisations I'd made over the years, but it's been working out really well. Seeing these benchmarks has helped reinforce the feeling that I've made the right choice.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    I'm disappointed Void didn't have the right software packages to tackle some of the benchmarks. But otherwise, it did well - nothing to be embarrassed about.

                    But yes, yay Debian. It's nice to see that "long time between stable releases" != "slow"

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
                      I am trolling: Debian stable believers, how does it feel to use 3 year old buggy and slow os.
                      Even if your comment explicitly says you are trolling (I guess you are being sarcastic due to how well Debian stable performed in this comparison), I'd like to add that there exists backports for Debian. I've been using Debian 8 (stable) since it launched, and I am running kernel 4.3 and mesa 11.1, which is not that old. This is straight from jessie-backports, not mixing with testing/unstable packages.

                      This is just to say that Debian stable can be stable AND you can have some of the (roughly) latest stuff too, provided by backports. Just because people keep repeating that Debian stable is "old software", it doesn't make it true. For instance, Debian 8 has had (since it launched ~1 year ago) more up-to date packages than the current Ubuntu LTS (14.04). Sure, when 16.04 comes out that won't be true anymore, but only for ~1 year, until Debian 9 comes out.


                      I realize your nickname is debianxfce, so I assume you are well acquainted with Debian and how it works . This post is just for other people reading this thread who might not get the full picture.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X