Ubuntu 9.04 Beta vs. Fedora 11 Beta

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Ubuntu 9.04 Beta vs. Fedora 11 Beta

Last week marked the release of the Ubuntu 9.04 Beta and this week there is the planned release of the Fedora 11 Beta. Both distributions are similar in the respect they will be upgrading several common packages like GNOME 2.26, but in Fedora 11 are more upstream (and experimental) bits like kernel mode-setting, the EXT4 file-system by default, and various other features. Being the Linux benchmarking fanatics that we are, we set out to run a few performance tests comparing the Ubuntu 9.04 Beta to the latest Rawhide packages that will make up today's Fedora 11 Beta release.

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=13654

[The_Monkey_King]

For those looking forward to the Fedora 11 Beta, it should be formally released within a few hours

Uhm, then why test a Rawhide build? (Admitting "builds of Fedora 11 do have various debugging options enabled.") Couldn't this wait until tomorrow?











Vote "Elvis" for Fedora 12 Codename!

[cb88]

On top of that comparing the two most bloated distros is pretty worthless IMO throw in some of the lighter ons like ArchLinux Debian and Slackware for good measure otherwise your just emitting propaganda and not real perspective

[GreatWalrus]

Thanks for doing this Phoronix.

It's interesting to see a sort of "regression" between the newer and older software, but it is my belief that a lot of the regressions get fixed through later small/bug-fix releases of the software. I think we will have to wait until the stable release of 2.6.29 to see significant or similar performance measurements.

cb88, though I do agree it would be neat to benchmark some of those distros you mentioned (I use arch myself), it seems like it would be harder to make it a fair game between each other since they are built by the user from the ground up.
Likewise, quite a majority of Linux users use Fedora and Ubuntu as their distribution, so benchmarking them caters to a lot of people. Also, users like us, from arch, can see the performance between the software versions and make a decision for our own systems.

[Michael]

Uhm, then why test a Rawhide build? (Admitting "builds of Fedora 11 do have various debugging options enabled.") Couldn't this wait until tomorrow?

The beta still has debugging options enabled.

[Dragoran]

The beta still has debugging options enabled.

Which makes both useless for benchmarks.

[kraftman]

On top of that comparing the two most bloated distros is pretty worthless IMO throw in some of the lighter ons like ArchLinux Debian and Slackware for good measure otherwise your just emitting propaganda and not real perspective

Define Arch Linux please :> Your Arch Linux, my or someone else Arch Linux? :D

[MaestroMaus]

On top of that comparing the two most bloated distros is pretty worthless IMO throw in some of the lighter ons like ArchLinux Debian and Slackware for good measure otherwise your just emitting propaganda and not real perspective

Or maybe, just maybe, anyone who is a little bit level headed will know that this is just an appetizer and that this test isn't meaningful.

Besides, if this is such a big deal for you, why don't you help Michael? I'm sure he'd appreciate it.

[cb88]

lol... what about gentoo or LFS X.x

well for debian there is the default install

well slackware is just what it is... most official packages are installed by default

and as far as Arch is custom package selection not an option these days... I guess gnome could be installed as the desktop for some comparability but even then there are loads of differences between gnome installs meh XD


so yeah maybe arch was a bad suggestion heh

[hax0r]

Archlinux please!

[MùPùF]

I may feel a bit foolish today, but I would like you to try Linux XP.

Am I really a fool today ? :D

[csmart]

I'm curious as to whether you had SELinux enabled in Fedora and AppArmour enabled in Ubuntu?

I'd like to see these benchmarks re-run with both systems disabled.

-c

[lsatenstein]

I'm curious as to whether you had SELinux enabled in Fedora and AppArmour enabled in Ubuntu?

I'd like to see these benchmarks re-run with both systems disabled.

-c

Also, we have no idea what each distribution reports when a bug is detected. The bug intercept code in one may be more efficient then in the other.

It is best to wait for later beta versions (Say April 15th), and redo the compares.

I noted lots of updates to Fedora 11 code today, April 1st. I bet a test with those modules will result in substantially different results.

[zinovsky]

Ubuntu always is more stable than fedora, also because fedora is a test distribution for redhat

[MaestroMaus]

Ubuntu always is more stable than fedora, also because fedora is a test distribution for redhat
Your just hoping for some Fedora fans to hop in and start another retarded Ubuntu vs Fedora war, don't you?

[yotambien]

Ubuntu always is more stable than fedora, also because fedora is a test distribution for redhat

Yes, because Ubuntu is known for being such a stable distribution and is not taken every 6 months from Debian Unstable and claim to do in that time what takes two and a half years to Debian developers. And because they don't dare to enable ridiculous things like PulseAudio or Desktop effects by default. Also, they normally take the right decisions on behalf of their users (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-session/+bug/249373).

[lsatenstein]

Ubuntu always is more stable than fedora, also because fedora is a test distribution for redhat

Actually, since version 8, Fedora has not put out a shaky product.
I use both Fedora and Ubuntu, and here is the difference.

Fedora, vs UBUNTU released versions are essentially the same. Only Fedora is snappier, and between 6mo and a year ahead of UBUNTU for the same applications.

UBUNTU, being an off-shore distribution, gives you access to "Ugly" codecs, Fedora, complying to USA law, does not, and Fedora does not tell you how to get them. You learn the url name from webs.

I have not had any Fedora crash, since 2007. That includes server applications and virtual machines.

Which is a better distribution. The better one is the one for which you have more comfort-- the first one you started with is always a favourite.

[remm]

As of kernel 2.6.29.1-46, the debug has been removed in F11. Perfomance is better and memory usage is down. So you can redo your testing now.

[remm]

Fedora, vs UBUNTU released versions are essentially the same. Only Fedora is snappier, and between 6mo and a year ahead of UBUNTU for the same applications.

I suppose it's very easy to see the 6 months difference right now due to KMS. F11 will have KMS for 90% of graphics cards out there (Radeon R600+ and Nvidia will be disabled by default, though), and Ubuntu will have nothing ;)

[zwaardmeester]

Where can I get the beautiful Fedora wallpaper (http://www.phoronix.net/image.php?id=ubuntu_fedora_q209&image=ubuntu_fedora_leonidas1)?

[WalmartSniperLX]

Yay my first post since my registration in 07 :S

Fedora and Ubuntu are my top two distros. Fedora, IMO, seems to have more up to date packages than Ubuntu. This can be both bad and good depending on your system, needs, and hardware. Currently, I have just one machine (lappy) and it's running Ubuntu 8.10. I have not had one single problem with it since my initial install of Ubuntu 8.04 (I did a distro upgrade).

So based on that, deffinately get Windows :D

[Svartalf]

Which is a better distribution. The better one is the one for which you have more comfort-- the first one you started with is always a favourite.

Which is a bit of a shame, then...

Yggdrasil Plug and Play hasn't been around for a long while now... ;)