Page 2 of 23 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 227

Thread: What Linux Distribution Should Be Benchmarked The Most?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    8

    Default

    I would propose openSUSE because you don't have the debug "problems" there and it's relatively easy to use a certain packagestate as a startpoint.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    57

    Default Distros to be benchmarked

    Hi!

    Comparisons IMHO should include:
    1. Ubuntu 12.04.x - because that's the stable one, the people will use for business purpose, etc.
    2. Ubuntu lastest - coz that's what other bunch of people use
    3. ArchLinux - coz that's bleeding edge
    4. Debian - the mother of bubuntus
    5. Fedora - kinda bleeding edge, but quite popular

    I don't think list should be larger, but one thing that could actually matter is using other type of kernels, like the one with BFQ disk scheduler, TuxOnIce, maybe BFS. So it's -pf kernel or -lqx.
    In the end the there will be quite more work if You do include those, but that's what I'm interested in, just ubuntu and only the latest one, well not for me.

    regards
    Kirurgs

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    160

    Default No distro, just software

    The question is wrong.
    I think you should benchmark vanilla software in their latest stable release.
    And no, i'm not talking about archlinux (which i use).
    If you benchmark haswell, then you should benchmark software compiled for it, with appropriate cflags.

    It is useless to came out with benchmarks like 64bit vs 32bit when 64bit builds are optimized for the whole cpu instruction set, while the 32bit one aren't. (i mean... it is unfair, probably features like sse3 and sse4 are left out, while supported, on 32bit builds, just because precompiled binaries).

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    330

    Default

    Please include Gentoo, I'd like to see what real benefits you gain from compiling all of your own software.

    I don't use it, but it's really the only distro that has a huge difference between the conventional ones.
    Last edited by peppercats; 07-26-2013 at 02:55 AM.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    164

    Default

    Fedora Please

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    46

    Default

    You guys and your distro wars did it...
    i guess this where we say good bye Phoronix
    since i do not care about any other distro phoronix will not be news site for me anymore i guess wich makes me VERY sad becuase i used to check in at least 5 times a day here to see the news :C

    For the trolls: Be carefull what u wish for, if ubuntu would to fall it wont fall alone...
    people dont like change and they would probably be like me and just give up on linux and go back to windows.
    Go head and hate me for saying the truth that you ignore because u are in love with other distro.

    Thank you for the years of fun Phoronix, will miss you.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Koszalin, Poland
    Posts
    137

    Default

    I'd like to see more tests of LSB compliant distros, like openSUSE and Fedora. OpenSUSE provides newer binary kernel packages in OBS repo.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    8

    Default

    @MrTheSoulz
    This isn't a distro-war, these are just answers to a question Michael has asked. Just to get some opinions from his readers. It's not a final decision...

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    211

    Default

    I would like to see Debian stable in the mix as a base point to compare newer distros against.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kokoko3k View Post
    The question is wrong.
    I think you should benchmark vanilla software in their latest stable release.
    And no, i'm not talking about archlinux (which i use).
    If you benchmark haswell, then you should benchmark software compiled for it, with appropriate cflags.

    It is useless to came out with benchmarks like 64bit vs 32bit when 64bit builds are optimized for the whole cpu instruction set, while the 32bit one aren't. (i mean... it is unfair, probably features like sse3 and sse4 are left out, while supported, on 32bit builds, just because precompiled binaries).
    The questions are different, not wrong. Just because it is not the question you are most interested in does not make it a "wrong" question.

    The question isn't "what is the absolute fastest this software can be run". That might be an interesting question in some regards, but it is simply not the question Phoronix is interested in.

    The question is "how fast will this run for typical users". Since typical users don't recompile all of their software for absolute optimization, doing so will not give results typical users will see.

Posting Permissions

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