Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FreeBSD/PC-BSD 10.3 vs. Linux Benchmarks

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

  • FreeBSD/PC-BSD 10.3 vs. Linux Benchmarks

    Phoronix: FreeBSD/PC-BSD 10.3 vs. Linux Benchmarks

    With FreeBSD 10.3 having been released followed by the desktop-oriented PC-BSD 10.3 release that's running rather nicely, I decided to run some open-source performance benchmarks atop PC-BSD 10.3 x64 compared to various Linux distributions.

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    Something looks funky with the clear linux setup. "-march=westmere"? That's a six year old processor.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by willmore View Post
      Something looks funky with the clear linux setup. "-march=westmere"? That's a six year old processor.
      That's currently part of their default CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS.
      Michael Larabel
      https://www.michaellarabel.com/

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Michael View Post

        That's currently part of their default CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS.
        Understood. Still, that's strange. Thanks for the clarification!

        Comment


        • #5
          I read these benchmarks as follows:

          * ZFS - fast
          * Clang 3.4 - slow

          As in - freebsd benefits from using ZFS, but suffers from using Clang 3.4 as a builder, rather than gcc, which (still) generates better quality code.

          Am I off?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by vladpetric View Post
            freebsd benefits from using ZFS, but suffers from using Clang 3.4 as a builder, rather than gcc, which (still) generates better quality code.
            Very likely, yes. So potentially GNU/kFreeBSD on ZFS could have the best of both.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by willmore View Post

              Understood. Still, that's strange. Thanks for the clarification!
              Those things generally cause little improvement, unless you have specialized hand-written code that makes use of newer processor instructions. Such code may live in the libc though ... (e.g., memset implemented with AVX2).

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by stevenc View Post

                Very likely, yes. So potentially GNU/kFreeBSD on ZFS could have the best of both.
                Indeed ... Or Ubuntu BSD, which is alive .

                Comment


                • #9
                  I'm very interested. Unfortunately, FBSD 10.03 still no support accelerated graphics for the Intel Haswell processors, but I understand it will be there in FBSD 11.0, so I'm waiting for that.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    How about ZFS on Ubuntu, aren't they have native ZFS support on 16.04? How will that compare to the ZFS optimized BSD?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X