Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Four-Way ARM Linux Distribution Comparison

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,567

    Default Four-Way ARM Linux Distribution Comparison

    Phoronix: Four-Way ARM Linux Distribution Comparison

    The latest ARM Linux benchmarks to share at Phoronix is a comparison of Ubuntu 12.10, Linaro 12.10, Fedora 17, and Arch Linux when running from the dual-core Cortex-A9 OMAP4460-based PandaBoard ES development board.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=18113

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,256

    Default

    I'm a little surprised at these results. I didn't expect arch to fall that far behind, although i have got the impression their ARM support is a little lacking. One of the things i found so weird about arch is its relatively poor support for anything that isn't x86, because you'd think a distro that sometimes compiles things on-the-fly would be easily cross platform.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    I'm a little surprised at these results. I didn't expect arch to fall that far behind, although i have got the impression their ARM support is a little lacking. One of the things i found so weird about arch is its relatively poor support for anything that isn't x86, because you'd think a distro that sometimes compiles things on-the-fly would be easily cross platform.
    Well, Arch is no Gentoo.


  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,583

    Default

    Disappointing that the recently released openSUSE 12.2 for ARM wasn't included in the mix but I imagine Michael was way to deep into these tests when it came out to include them.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Koszalin, Poland
    Posts
    126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    Disappointing that the recently released openSUSE 12.2 for ARM wasn't included in the mix but I imagine Michael was way to deep into these tests when it came out to include them.
    Exactly what I was about to say.

    It would be also interesting to see results for some mid or low end amd64 system for comparison as to how much slower arm is.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    7

    Default Unity

    Why are all distributions being tested from the console while Linaro is being teted with Unity2D?
    This seams to be a handicap for Linaro (which otherwise does quite well, together with Ubuntu)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyber Killer View Post
    Exactly what I was about to say.

    It would be also interesting to see results for some mid or low end amd64 system for comparison as to how much slower arm is.
    H.264 Video Encoding
    1.4 GHz ARM9 Calxeda Quad Core - 11.82 fps
    3.2 GHz Core i5 3470 - 107.36 fps
    9 times slower
    4 times slower at same frequency

    7-Zip Compression
    1.4 GHz ARM9 - 2176 MIPS
    3.2 GHz Core i5 - 13778 MIPS
    6.3 times slower
    2.8 times slower at same frequency

    Source:
    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...000_atom&num=3
    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ei5_3470&num=5

Posting Permissions

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