Interesting article comparing Windows XP SP3 and Ubuntu Hardy (8.04) benchmarks

[Mr. Picklesworth]

Here it is (http://mssaleh.wordpress.com/2008/05/19/ubuntu-804-lts-vs-windows-xp-sp3-application-performance-benchmark/)! (Linked from this blog post (http://blog.kagou.fr/post/2008/05/21/Ubuntu-804-contre-Windows-XP); thanks!).

Really interesting results for the multitasking stuff. I was also rather surprised by multimedia results, particularly given that Blender uses OpenGL. Here is another recent article (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=nvidia_workstation_perf&num=1) specifically comparing graphics benchmarks that had surprisingly poor results from Windows and quite good results from Ubuntu. Granted, that one is Windows Vista. It could be interesting to see their test repeated for XP.

[Samueltehg33k]

windows on a EEE........scary

[JanvL]

The article is not very good, it has also been mentioned in www.osnews.com.
I am not sure what the author wanted to tell us, but to me he just had some fun comparing things without bothering about the fact that he compared apples with plums.

[qazwsx]

He didn't even mentioned was it amd64 or i386 (should make significant difference in multimedia).

x264 performs sometimes very badly in 32bit (for me it sometimes have skipped sse se2, mmX, mmx2 and 3DNow optimizations).

And why he didin't use apt-build in multimedia stuff?

[Mr. Picklesworth]

He was running the generic kernel, as mentioned somewhere in that...
Indeed, sounds like a 64-bit kernel would be good comparison.

[forrestcupp]

He didn't even mentioned was it amd64 or i386 (should make significant difference in multimedia).
That's a great point, but I guess to be fair, you'd have to compare it to 64-bit XP.

[LaRoza]

Here it is (http://mssaleh.wordpress.com/2008/05/19/ubuntu-804-lts-vs-windows-xp-sp3-application-performance-benchmark/)! (Linked from this blog post (http://blog.kagou.fr/post/2008/05/21/Ubuntu-804-contre-Windows-XP); thanks!).

Really interesting results for the multitasking stuff. I was also rather surprised by multimedia results, particularly given that Blender uses OpenGL. Here is another recent article (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=nvidia_workstation_perf&num=1) specifically comparing graphics benchmarks that had surprisingly poor results from Windows and quite good results from Ubuntu. Granted, that one is Windows Vista. It could be interesting to see their test repeated for XP.

How is that fair? A six year old OS verses a modern distro less than a few months old?

[Mazza558]

I'm pretty sure 7.10 would have beaten XP on all levels, since 8.04 is pretty slow.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

Actually, 8.04 is pretty darn fast, scheduling-wise. A new kernel update coming down the pipes (in hardy-proposed right now) solves that issue with sudo, so hopefully you'll find it more satisfying in a while.

[emshains]

Well, from the windows side, you could say that gimp was designed on linux by linux fans, they could just made it work slower in windows, because they hate it.
Linux side, the kernel was not modified to the exact specs of the hardware.
Windows side, windows uses all of the hardware potencial out of the box, while linux has to be modified.
Linux side, we win the time back, when we multi-task.
Windows side, yeah but If I need a game running, but I want music at background, it will give most of the resources to the game, which is more resource demanding.
Linux side, we can adjust the priority of a single, or many proceses.
Windows side, we dont need to tinker, we get what we want out of the box/
Linux side, we love to tinker, because we now that we will be rewarded.

* This is the part were people are showing their charecteristics*

Windows side, it takes a lot of time.
Linux side, it would not if the company of which we dont speak (because we dont laugh at sick people) is bribing (my point of view) hardware/software companies to make linux less efficient.








But was it a fresh install ther ?
If it was a month old XP with a teen in the other end of it, it would be slow as HELL. Linux gets slow up to a point. Windows atlast beats linux, it doesnt know where to stop, because it slows down with no limits. It can take from 4-20 minutes to boot. I need only 2-6.

[Mazza558]

Actually, 8.04 is pretty darn fast, scheduling-wise. A new kernel update coming down the pipes (in hardy-proposed right now) solves that issue with sudo, so hopefully you'll find it more satisfying in a while.

I'll probably switch back at 8.04.1, but the ATi driver is awful for me. Gutsy's was a lot better.

[emshains]

I'm pretty sure 7.10 would have beaten XP on all levels, since 8.04 is pretty slow.

I agree. 7.10 ran much faster on my old 1.6 ghz sempron. But wow actually runs faster in 8.04, but it is slower on multi-tasking, even my music sometimes gets to wait, and that really pisses me off.