Ubuntu 14.04/16.04 vs. Ubuntu Bash On Windows 10 Anniversary Performance

[edwaleni]

That x264 result has me fascinated. The only thing I can think of is that the SIMD support in Windows 10 has some Intel secret sauce that hasn't made it to the world of FOSS. I know Intel provided MSFT a lot of help with SIMD performance explicitly for Skylake, but with WSL overhead I wouldn't expect it to outperform native.

[emblemparade]

Astonishing.

As usual, Phoronix breaks through the hand-waving and gets to the results. Say what you will about any of it, Windows is proving itself to be a compelling OS for running Linux and Unix software. Their partnership with Canonical has made it extremely easy to use their Linux subsystem support with a very a full repository of software. Whether this is actually necessary or desirable is a separate issue. The fact is that it works today and works very well.

[Tritlo]

Could you explain how you upgraded the subsystem from 14.04.05 to 16.04? I'm having some problems with the official explanation.

P.S. Please keep the Bash on Ubuntu on Linux performance comparisons going!

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Ubuntu 14.04/16.04 vs. Ubuntu Bash On Windows 10 Anniversary Performance

When Microsoft and Canonical brought Bash and Ubuntu's user-space to Windows 10 earlier this year I ran some preliminary benchmarks of Ubuntu on Windows 10 versus a native Ubuntu installation on the same hardware. Now that this "Windows Subsystem for Linux" is part of the recent Windows 10 Anniversary Update, I've carried out some fresh benchmarks of Ubuntu running atop Windows 10 compared to Ubuntu running bare metal.

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=23419