Just been browsing and came across this dicussion,
and thought i might be able to give some input.
I'm a software grad (well this summer) and use
both linux(gentoo 2.6.xxx cant remember specifically) and xp pro sp1 as home
os's (games, dev etc) and when building a fairly small application i felt that
it was taking too long to build my code using linux (approx 70 secs). So I
logged into my windows and it did it in under 40 secs, quite a
difference.
However, these two machines were of different
spec
xp: 2500xp(1.833mhz) barton
512cache,1gig ram, 7200 sata hdd (high spec)
linux:1900xp(1.6mhz) thoroughbred 256cache,
1gig ram, 5400 ide hdd (fairly low spec)
I would accept a relatively small diff between the
two machines (but a difference since one is more powerful) and since there were
approx 150 source files the hard drive reads could have caused a
difference.
So what I had was a biased test
result.
My first thoughts would be to write a tiny
application that would not use the harddrive and compare again, so i made
a simple program to count from 0 to a parameter x number of times, test data was
to count 0-999999999 100 times. XP box did it in 3mins 10 secs, linux 5 mins 4
secs ( i did this numerous times and results were always v similar). Again big
difference, so it definetely wasn't the harddrive's access time etc. So
the only way I was going to find out was to install Linux on my xp box and dual
boot it (which I did).
So XP and Gentoo Linux on the same box, and xp
still beats it hands down (it only improved by around 30 secs), which really
dissapointed me. It makes me want to use my xp box for more stuff than
previously, which i had been trying not since i like using kde over the Windows
desktop
Now one thing I should have mentioned earlier
is that the app was written in Java (compiled using Sun's jdk1.4.2 (not gentoo's
blackdown since it's too buggy)) and we are therefore also testing the platform
implementation of the VM (if you don't know about java basically when code runs
there is a middleman between the code running and the OS (the Java Virtual
Machine). It is possible that the jdk does not work as well on Linux but
this is what I use and so do millions of others, and therefore it's can
be a v good benchmark. I will shortly if i get some time repeat the
tests in C++ to remove this factor (it interfaces directly with the OS since
it's compiled into native binaries) and if any1 does care for the result then
let me know.
Now if you think my benchmark is totally
unsafe/inaccurate as a means for benchmarking then feel free to state so, but
compiling and running java code is something I do frequently, and Linux can't
seem to do it as quickly as XP.
Just to some up my findings, XP runs simple
sequential cpu tasks not much less than twice the speed of Linux.
My afterthoughts about the two OS's is that if I
ran multiple threads of my test (say 500) that my XP box would flake out and
linux would handle it much better, perhaps when i go away for the wkend next
i'll do that but right now iv got far too much work to do on them (final yr
proj).
Hope this helped any1,
-andy
|
- Re: Linux/Windows Universal Benchmark Andy Morris
- Re: Linux/Windows Universal Benchmark Kent West
- Re: Re: Linux/Windows Universal Benchmark Colin Watson
- Re: Re: Linux/Windows Universal Benchmark Andy Morris