PC-BSD 8.0 vs. Kubuntu 9.10 Benchmarks

[phoronix]

Phoronix: PC-BSD 8.0 vs. Kubuntu 9.10 Benchmarks

PC-BSD 8.0 was released last week and while we have already delivered FreeBSD 8.0 benchmarks including against Debian GNU/kFreeBSD and Fedora / Debian / OpenBSD / OpenSolaris for which PC-BSD is based, we took this opportunity to deliver a fresh set of *BSD benchmarks. In this article we have benchmarks of PC-BSD 8.0 x64 against Kubuntu 9.10 x86_64.

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=14643

[Sacha]

So, UFS sucks that badly hey? Or is there something else that affects filesystem related tests?

[Deng XueFeng]

they use different version of gcc, and all known, gcc 4.4.x have better optimization than 4.2.1.
most of these benchmark are focus on CPU calculation.
Could do some other benchmark. like tcp/udp network performance, mysql performance, bind/fork performance. etc.

[portets43]

Hey Michael, how many hard drives have died on you prematurely from constant formatting/reformatting of various file systems and OS'?

[frische]

formatting a drive is not a stress test; it's not like every block has to be rewritten

[portets43]

Oh. I've heard of a couple people losing drives because of constant reformatting. Would that just be due to faulty/cheap drives?

[L33F3R]

they use different version of gcc, and all known, gcc 4.4.x have better optimization than 4.2.1.
most of these benchmark are focus on CPU calculation.
Could do some other benchmark. like tcp/udp network performance, mysql performance, bind/fork performance. etc.

Michael the test was invalid. everyone knows that kubuntu starts with a K and PC-BSD starts with a P. You should make kubuntu into pubuntu or PC-BSD into KC-BSD for the test to be valid. Now i kindly ask you to do more tests, this time without discriminating against the alphabet.

[Rip-Rip]

Michael the test was invalid. everyone knows that kubuntu starts with a K and PC-BSD starts with a P. You should make kubuntu into pubuntu or PC-BSD into KC-BSD for the test to be valid. Now i kindly ask you to do more tests, this time without discriminating against the alphabet.

Yeah, some people are not understanding the meaning of "Out-of box" benchmarking...

[Shining Arcanine]

I registered just to post in this thread.

they use different version of gcc, and all known, gcc 4.4.x have better optimization than 4.2.1.
most of these benchmark are focus on CPU calculation.
Could do some other benchmark. like tcp/udp network performance, mysql performance, bind/fork performance. etc.

Such benchmarks would be nice to see, although they probably would need to be done with both operating systems being compiled with the same version of GCC for them to meaningfully isolate the pros and cons of each OS.

Yeah, some people are not understanding the meaning of "Out-of box" benchmarking...

I run Gentoo Linux. Tell me more about this out-of-box benchmark of which you speak. It is a foreign concept to me.

[mtippett]

I registered just to post in this thread.

Such benchmarks would be nice to see, although they probably would need to be done with both operating systems being compiled with the same version of GCC for them to meaningfully isolate the pros and cons of each OS.


I run Gentoo Linux. Tell me more about this out-of-box benchmark of which you speak. It is a foreign concept to me.

To an extent. There is a 80/20 rule to most things. 80% of the people (even Gentoo people) won't know all the knobs to turn. They rely on the original packager (or ebuild maintainer) to get most things set up from there.

Same for compilers. There are differences between icc/gcc/sun studio that all have particular strengths. For most users however, they rely on the upstream maintainers to do the right technology selection for them.

But again, it's all about what you are trying to test. Phoronix tries to test the "full system" as provided by the vendor. If you want to test the kernel/libraries as shipped between distributions, then yes - the same compiler version is probably needed. But Michael is testing the "full system", not the lower parts.

Matthew