Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26

Thread: Sabayon 7 vs. Ubuntu 11.10 Performance

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,415

    Default Sabayon 7 vs. Ubuntu 11.10 Performance

    Phoronix: Sabayon 7 vs. Ubuntu 11.10 Performance

    The release of Ubuntu 11.10 "Oneiric Ocelot" this week captured most of the Linux spotlight, but also arriving this week was Sabayon 7, the Gentoo-based Linux distribution that's meant to be easy-to-use and desktop-oriented. In this article Sabayon 7 has been pitted against Ubuntu 11.10 with its stock Linux 3.0 kernel and its new experimental Fusion kernel.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=16529

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    36

    Default Archlinx

    Hi,

    Thanks for the benchmark, how about benchmarking Archlinux against ubuntu ?

    Thanks ! :-)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    39

    Default

    just tried Sabayon 7 for the first time, it feels snappier than ubuntu, BUT: I have an ati 4770, and after a while the KDE desktop started to fail ( all black , however is the first time I used kde, so It may be a driver/kde problem), also I use dual monitors, and couldn't make it work as 2 separated desktops (only mirror mode), couldn't find the software manager, and I'm not sure how to install old software (I need pylons 1.0 and SQLalchmey 0.5.3) It looks nice overall, but I'll pass.

  4. #4

    Default

    What does Ubuntu 11.04 having the GCC 4.5 compiler even mean?

    I do not understand what this means in the context of a binary distribution where nothing is ever compiled.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shining Arcanine View Post
    What does Ubuntu 11.04 having the GCC 4.5 compiler even mean?

    I do not understand what this means in the context of a binary distribution where nothing is ever compiled.
    It had to be compiled sometime. Just because the distro maintainers do it, doesn't mean it wasn't compiled. I would expect that the distro was compiled with the GCC version they ship with it, so 11.04 would have been compiled with GCC 4.5.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    There is nothing "gentoo" in sabayon, actually.
    Because Ubuntu and Sabayon, being BOTH binary had different number of testings(as in "popularity") and with backup by commercial company, no wonder Ubuntu kernel version won.

    Thanks for benchies, though!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Owatonna, Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    96

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    There is nothing "gentoo" in sabayon, actually.
    What are you talking about? Sabayon can use Gentoo's Portage system if the user chooses to.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,908

    Default Sabayon is to Gentoo like Ubuntu is to Debian

    Simile that thing

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    3

    Default What's the point of assessing the Performance of Desktop distros

    Hi,

    I am new to this forum, but I am along time GNU/Linux user.

    As per my understanding, both ubuntu and sabayon are desktop distros. A desktop user would be less interested and less affected by the write speeds, or even scores of cpu benchmarks (of course, unless the distro has done something seriously wrong). Here, it would be useful to compare the distros on basis of their usability, stablity etc.

    IMO comparisions like these don't accomplish anything fruitful.

    The benchmarks would be relevant to server or the HPC audience.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,532

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by openfreak View Post
    As per my understanding, both ubuntu and sabayon are desktop distros. A desktop user would be less interested and less affected by the write speeds, or even scores of cpu benchmarks (of course, unless the distro has done something seriously wrong). Here, it would be useful to compare the distros on basis of their usability, stablity etc.

    IMO comparisions like these don't accomplish anything fruitful.

    The benchmarks would be relevant to server or the HPC audience.
    I respectfully disagree. A "desktop" user is not limited to web surfing, mp3 playing etc. I am a desktop user and write speeds and cpu benchmarks are important to my tasks such as encoding, media editing, dbase management and development, etc.

Posting Permissions

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