Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 80

Thread: Benchmarks Of The Gentoo-based Sabayon

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,102

    Default Benchmarks Of The Gentoo-based Sabayon

    Phoronix: Benchmarks Of The Gentoo-based Sabayon

    For those looking to experiment with a Gentoo-based Linux system but are not looking forward to the obstacles of installing Gentoo itself, an easier and quicker approach can be to use a distribution like Sabayon Linux. Sabayon uses pre-compiled x86 and x86_64 packages for installing the Linux distribution from its LiveDVD and uses their own Entropy system for package management, though these binary packages are compiled from Gentoo's Portage and using the Portage system is still available. The LiveDVD installer is also very easy to use and is just like using Ubuntu's Ubiquity or Red Hat's Anaconda. With all the benchmarking though of Ubuntu and Fedora as of late on Phoronix, we found it time to put out some benchmarks of Sabayon Linux. Up today are benchmarks from the recently released Sabayon 5.1 along with the older Sabayon 4.2 and for comparison is Kubuntu 9.10.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=14481

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    215

    Default

    Nice comparision! Could you do some more testing with opensource graphic drivers on both Sabayon and Kubuntu systems? I'm most interrested in Radeon R300 driver benchmark.

    Edit: There's no information about which version of NVidia binary driver the tested distribution were using in benchmark but it would be very usefull, too.
    Last edited by xeros; 01-04-2010 at 02:57 AM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    89

    Default

    Thank You Michael for looking at something not Ubuntu
    I'm a little bit disappointed that the article is kind of superficial.
    There is no real background, difference or any other useful info like installation "flavors". BTW, Sabayon uses Red Hat's Anaconda installer and not "like".
    I have to admit that article is about what was stated in title.
    IMHO, "real" articles are what we (readers) want.
    By "real" i mean not only 10 benchmark graphs.
    But also more useful info. After reading this article you probably will not try it.
    It's like "We know well Mazda (Ubuntu) and now we will learn about Toyota (Sabayon) by comparing max speaker volume and break lights intensity."
    If you need help, just ask. At least few readers will be happy to help.
    Why i'm not doing it by myself ? Because I can only help with this.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,641

    Default

    Well you could test the latest official Kanotix Excalibur preview too and fix the pts gui issues the same time. No longer needed windows should be closed not stay on top.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Hellas
    Posts
    1,098

    Default

    Meh! Sabayon is not as fast as I thought since it's Gentoo based. But that's normal since it uses prebuilt generic x86_64 binaries.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Hmmm, Im surprised we got beaten by Kubuntu in a couple of things. I agree a more through analysis is needed however.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Apopas View Post
    Meh! Sabayon is not as fast as I thought since it's Gentoo based. But that's normal since it uses prebuilt generic x86_64 binaries.
    Yup, they're prebuilt, some obviously with slightly different optimization
    parameters than others, considering some of the larger differences. It's
    great to see a non-Ubuntu distro for a change. Gentoo would be too much,
    ofcourse, since any gains are quickly offset by sheer compilation time.

    As a system for benchmarking x86 vs x64, though, Gentoo makes sense, cause
    you can have optimization parameters such as SSE1/2/3, -O2/3 and similar
    under control as opposed to Ubuntu/Debian where apparently some of these
    are being set only at the x64 level.

    Once more, credits to Michael for 'rocking the boat' a little bit
    Keep up the good work!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,641

    Default

    Also i vote to set a filesystem standard for benchmarks. Use ext4 as filesystem even when it is not the default one. Then differences could also happen due to different default from one kernel to the next, but usually should be similar with the same kernel version (unless those defaults are patched or changed in the /etc/fstab).

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    89

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by clavko View Post
    Yup, they're prebuilt, some obviously with slightly different optimization
    parameters than others, considering some of the larger differences. It's
    great to see a non-Ubuntu distro for a change. Gentoo would be too much,
    ofcourse, since any gains are quickly offset by sheer compilation time.
    As a Gentoo user i can tell you that "Sheer Compilation Time" is a myth
    For example, it takes 56 seconds to install Firefox from source.
    To recompile the whole thing with over 1K packages is less then 7 hours (I don't measure it usually and the "emerge -j 5 -vuNDe world" executed once something severely broken or something like GCC updated)
    Again, the average package installation takes same time is precompiled binary.
    And i'm talking about Q9300 with 4GB RAM... It's not fastest computer in any way. But you do need a lot of RAM. The trick is to use RAM disk (autofs) for portage work folder. But, RAM is cheap

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    115

    Default

    I don't know how much does it take to compile Firefox on a quad core,
    but i know how much it takes to do it on a single 2GHz Mobile Sempron
    core, and let me tell you... it's bordering with 'not worth it".
    (the usual dependencies of mozilla-firefox are about an hour or so).

    Just yesterday it took me about 2-3 hours to compile Qt 4.6.1 and about
    an hour and a half for recompiling KDE 4.3.4 afterwards. So in a way,
    yes, the 'sheer compilation time' is a rather substantial variable here
    at "clavko's". However, I'm an enthusiast and prefer to do it my own way.
    I don't expect anyone with a less than dual core try and copy me.

    As a one Gentoo sufferer to another, best regards

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •