So i guess it is proven now what i said about OpenSSL test in
The 2.6.29 test definitely was run with 64 bit!!! Compare to:
The speed improvement is only possible using a 64 bit build. Different kernel do not matter for that. Maybe for 3d performance + intel benchmarks. Or maybe add 2.6.29/30 tests.
Last edited by Kano; 05-18-2009 at 06:49 AM.
I am a Linux user too, but I have to admit that the 3d games benchmark is WAY MORE important than the openssl signs/second...
Originally Posted by Jimmy
Unless we don't want Linux as a gaming platform.I know I want.
Hopefully, the nasty Intel driver regression will be fixed soon and Linux on Intel graphics will outperform MAC.
And since SQQLite regression is already fixed, soon we will be able to say that Ubuntu/Linux outperforms MAC in most aspects. Unless Snow Leopard can improve enough to keep up.
What's going on here?! :O
Originally Posted by Kano
ext4 would be very interesting indeed but the current test should take place with ext3 as long as it begun with ext3. If Michael had used ext4 for 64 bit then we couldn't make a comparison between 32 and 64 since we would have two different factors (the bits and the filesystem).
Originally Posted by kraftman
Well without the comparison urls you can never be sure if the results are really done on 32 or 64 bit.
I just went through the numbers, I may be off by won or two, but Ubuntu-64 one 15 tests, Mac 13, Ubuntu 32-bit won 1. And this includes 4 or 5 graphics tests, where there is an obvious regression in the Intel drivers.
In terms of "sweeps" (tests won by a factor two or more), I recorded 5 for mac and 4 for Ubuntu. Again, most sweeps for Mac are Graphics.
So, it looks to me as if, apart from the graphics regression, Ubuntu 64 bit performs better overall.