ok its simpel intel is bad becourse the cloused source driver on macos and windows is much much much faster than the opensource one!
there is no need for testing hartware if the resuld be cleare bevor the
only nvidia and amd have a solution to have the same driver base to windows,macos and linux.
and macos.... is SSE3 compilet 32bit ubuntu only 486/686 compilet
macos is sse3 and 64bit ubuntu is only sse2...
macos has diverend compiler to macos use the intel compiler much much much faster than the GCC compiler!
if you make a real benchmark of the OS and not the compiler ...
you need to recompile a ubuntu linux completly on intelcompiler with SSE3 only support.-
then no "intel" VGA-- the result will be clear...
linux win every test and macos lose everytest.
but if you test like michael"phoronix" test in the past...
intelcompiler VS GCC
32bit-SS3 vs 486
32bit-sse3 vs 64bit-sse2
clousedsource intel driver vs opensource linux driver...
all overall.. its a shame to test like this!
actually - that is the most logical way to perform this test - as shows how they compare based on configurations that the vast majority of people use.
recompiling everything would be pretty much pointless because relatively very few people would have thier system set up like that.
There WILL be diffrences in drivers and so, but ALL tested systems have ACCELRATED 2D/3D drivers for Intel cards.Originally Posted by vermaden
AMD does not offer ANY drivers for FreeBSD/NetBSD/OpenSolaris.
nVidia only offers limited i386 driver for FreeBSD and NOTHING for NetBSD.
The other way to be EQUAL for all systems will be using some old graphics card/untypical card where ALL systems will be forced to use 2D VESA driver to accomplish same slowdown everywhere ...
If one candidate fits best for benchmarking it's Gentoo, IMHO. It would reflect to what extent one could fit a Linux distribution to the target CPU to get the best performance and to what extent the performance gain is worth the pain.
I would suggest benchmarking a stable ARCH (x86_64) against a recent Intel CPU with GCC 4.3.2 and sse4.1, for instance. And for bleeding-edgers, a ~ARCH (~x86_64) with the latest GCC 4.4.x, to see what impact the recent optimizations has over the whole system.
But in general, I would expect Gentoo to have (sane) CFLAGS adapted to the target CPU only.
Edit: I should clarify that a bit more. SSE3 typically only shows huge gains when used with a processor that has long pipelines.
Last edited by deanjo; 08-17-2009 at 11:20 AM.
I'd be interested to see Dragonfly BSD thrown into the mix. The HAMMER filesystem is supposedly now production ready and the kernel architecture has diverged from the other free BSDs.
HAMMER filesystem is not a ZFS rival or something like that, its developed to work in cluster environments.
Abou DragonflyBSD itself, it scales as FreeBSD 4.x (DragonflyBSD forked from FreeBSD 4.8) and works well only with single core CPUs, it does not use more then one core, its still big GIANT LOCK kernel.
Check these benchmarks below:
So adding DragonflyBSD to the test will not bring nothing new here, it is and will be slow, until they rewrite SMP subsystem as it has been done in FreeBSD 4.x --> 8.x
True dat.So adding DragonflyBSD to the test will not bring nothing new here, it is and will be slow, until they rewrite SMP subsystem as it has been done in FreeBSD 4.x --> 8.x
The DragonflyBSD had good intentions for forking but so far it hasn't gone too well. When they get SMP they might be back on the map.