The plain fact here is that Ubuntu clearly underperformed in this test. It's up to somebody to run the benchmark on a properly configured linaro/ubuntu system (using 'performance' frequency scaling governor) with a better compiler and share the results.
BTW, the first initial Ubuntu 11.10 phoronix benchmark on Pandaboard ES showed such abysmal performance that it even got me motivated to register in this forum (because somebody was wrong on the Internet! ). So I had posted my own results from a similar 1.2GHz dual-core Cortex-A9 board for comparison and it used stable Gentoo with gcc 4.5 at that time (versus newer ubuntu gcc 4.6). There were some Ubuntu performance improvements since that time, which were depicted on phoronix as kinda "Ubuntu being on the forefront of ARM development" and not just "sore losers are catching up" Seriously, linaro is doing a lot of gcc related ARM work which eventually gets accepted in upstream gcc and deserves credit for this. But I get a feeling that the end users are treated as guinea pigs and the effect of a lot of minor incremental improvements gets eclipsed by some stupid bugs which ruin the overall performance in Ubuntu distro.
About Gentoo compilation time. When using Gentoo for desktop (kernel, xorg, kde, firefox, libreoffice and quite a pack of other software) , on a standard quad-core (phenom II, core i first generation), the complete tree reemerge takes about 14 hours. But you hardly ever do this, because since glibc and gcc are usually kept same, packages are emerged or updated, as well as their dependencies, but never the whole system. I found Gentoo to be far easier to maintain than Arch.
You have the results from some other linux distro (which happens to be not "Stable Gentoo", but who cares).It takes at least two in order to perform any kind of comparison.
Last edited by ssvb; 09-09-2012 at 05:01 PM.