Benchmarking The Ubuntu "Low-Jitter" Linux Kernel

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Benchmarking The Ubuntu "Low-Jitter" Linux Kernel

There's an independently maintained "low-jitter" version of the Linux kernel targeting Ubuntu, which claims to be faster, but is that really the case?..

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

[chris200x9]

This article made me laugh so much, thanks! Nothing like a good old placebo.

[YoungManKlaus]

the thing is not called low _jitter_ for no reason ... maybe you should actually also benchmark jitter in various fields (eg. std. distribution of apache response times, frame jitter, ...) instead of "raw performance"

[david_lynch]

The whole point of low jitter is low jitter. Running throughput benchmarks pretty much misses the point.

[Vadi]

Well that was a joke. Where's the magical 3x performance and amazing desktop responsiveness promised by the posters?

Compile your own kernel, they said...

[coder543]

Check out TechReport's articles on what jitter is... that might help for next time. These benchmarks have absolutely nothing to do with jitter.

[ryszardzonk]

1. Benchmarks just proved that those patches in fact have impact on the kernel
2. They are likely actually improve the responsivness as one would except the lower scores that might come cause of extra overhead.
3, One should be happy that drops in overal performance is hardly noticable

ps anyone tested the patches and may comment about the "low-jitter"?

[89c51]

How is jitter defined in computer kernels. I know what jitter is in electronics but kernels?

[log0]

How is jitter defined in computer kernels. I know what jitter is in electronics but kernels?

Delay variation till a process gets the cpu again due to scheduling I think.

[Decatf]

You should punch some speed holes in your car. I did it. It works.