Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 62

Thread: Windows 7 & Windows 8 vs. Ubuntu 13.04 & Fedora 18

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,303

    Default

    [QUOTE=jayrulez;324226]
    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post

    I read OSNews but I wasn't aware there was an article on MobiCore. Do you mind linking to it?

    There are quite a few solutions available for running Linux as a task on microkernels. Some are Codezero, L4Linux, The Robin project, Solution from OK Labs now owned by General Dyamics.

    As to why I mentioned those microkernels, they could be ported to all the architectures that Linux runs on if one was motivated enough to do that.
    But fair enough since you mentioned that you are talking about what is available now and also a fair point that I did not mention that I was talking about "ideal" solutions.

    Just a note: QNX supports ARM, POWER, X86, SH and MIPS. Obviously not close to the range of architectures supported by Linux but shows that it could be done if desired.

    Most people I've had to deal with regarding these topics are actually fan boys that believe that Linux is the end all of operating system development so forgive me for pooling you with them initially.
    Here's the only link I could find that mentioned the l4 kernel and galaxy s3v(well, actually its a comment to an article...): http://www.osnews.com/thread?544120
    The press release linked to is completely useless, and that company's site has mostly ad-speak level descriptions of the tech. There are some links to some pdfs at their site but all returned the http 404 code.
    Don't forget about windriver. They are a pretty big player as well.
    QNX runs on several architectures, but that, of course, doesn't mean that it scales efficiently. I've looked for some numbers since it claims to scale well, but couldn't find any. I'd especially be curious how well it handles massive smp since that seems to have been a fairly late feature added to what has been a fairly old kernel. I would expect it to be damn good at horizontal scaling, though.
    BTW, no problem with the assumption. This is phoronix after all

  2. #32

    Default

    If anything this shows what a placebo effect Windows 8 has been having on people who said "Windows 8 is better for gaming than Windows 7!". It's pretty obvious almost nothing changed.

    As for the OpenGL drivers - let's just say Intel sucks at writing drivers. They have a decade of catching up with Nvidia and AMD. If even Nvidia and AMD drivers are not up to par yet because they haven't put too many engineers (or the best of them) on those OpenGL drivers, you can imagine it's even worse in Intel's case, where they have that much less experience writing drivers for the latest OpenGL 4.3 features.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    121

    Default

    As i said before in these useless comparisons :
    1) its like comparing 1 game to thousands of thousands of games, plus it doesnt really show real performance, because linux doesnt have any aaa or aa games, so these comparisons are more like "100 year of history of oldest games in da world"...
    2) its intel graphics we are talking about, its made for longer battery life, not for performance, so...
    3) not to mention fact, that intel linux drivers is always under development, and on windows its "released and forgotten", linux drivers still is very bad.
    4) windows 8 is not made to be fastest, especially with intel graphics...

    And why the hell author of these stupid comparisons is so dumb ? Why he cant compare a real graphic cards, that were made for gaming, like geforce 690 gtx or radeon 7900 or something like that ????? Why oh why the hell did he choose to combine most useless things in this fkin world - linux + intel graphics + some useless old games... What was he smoking ????????? And even cheap nvidia or amd graphics cards are much much faster than intel graphics... Why he want to drive lada instead of ferrari ???
    Last edited by startzz; 04-06-2013 at 04:43 AM.

  4. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jayrulez View Post
    Linux (the kernel) is not good at everything because there are certain trade offs made so that it can be good at some things.
    It is, because you can tune it easily. Trade offs are everywhere, but in Linux you have control over them.

  5. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wilfred View Post
    He also showed results for fedora which does not use unity.
    It's a pity though that ms windows is faster. :-(
    What's pity is phoronix didn't mention Linux intel driver is much younger than their proprietary one.

  6. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jayrulez View Post
    Well more power to you dude. Stick it to those "freedom-limiting proprietary-software-supporting" corporations.

    Why would you then be interested in windows 8 performance results since there is no conceivable way you'll use it?
    Maybe because he wants to have full performance and use Freedom operating system? Maybe because he doesn't want his data to be sent to m$?

  7. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jayrulez View Post
    Most people I've had to deal with regarding these topics are actually fan boys that believe that Linux is the end all of operating system development so forgive me for pooling you with them initially.
    There's nothing better, so they're right.

    Just a note: QNX supports ARM, POWER, X86, SH and MIPS. Obviously not close to the range of architectures supported by Linux but shows that it could be done if desired.
    And that's meaningless, because qnx is crap compared to Linux. Qnx supports arm, power, x86, but so what? It's damn slow, featureless crap.
    Last edited by kraftman; 04-06-2013 at 05:00 AM.

  8. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jayrulez View Post
    So can most if not all kernels. You just need to do the work to enable it right? This is not exclusive to Linux.
    Nope. Most of the kernels aren't so flexible and when comes to proprietary ones you can nearly tune nothing.

    There are various things that Linux cannot do without drastic changes that the developers probably wouldn't agree with.
    Who cares? It's open source and you can take what you want and do what you want from it. I see your logic fails.

  9. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by startzz View Post
    And why the hell author of these stupid comparisons is so dumb ? Why he cant compare a real graphic cards, that were made for gaming, like geforce 690 gtx or radeon 7900 or something like that ????? Why oh why the hell did he choose to combine most useless things in this fkin world - linux + intel graphics + some useless old games... What was he smoking ????????? And even cheap nvidia or amd graphics cards are much much faster than intel graphics... Why he want to drive lada instead of ferrari ???
    It's because of same reasons why moronix is advertising apple and llvm. I bet he gets money from ms and apple for his dumb articles and advertisements.

    PS. I bet next benchmarks will be using catalyst and some other shitty games. Catalyst is known to be slower on Linux. He doesn't like to benchmark Nvidia, because it's the best Linux graphic driver, so windoze could lost.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,988

    Default

    Re float and S3TC questions, have some direct links:
    http://openbenchmarking.org/system/1...013.04/glxinfo
    http://openbenchmarking.org/system/1...a%2018/glxinfo

    Both have s2tc it seems, only ubuntu has float.

Posting Permissions

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