On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 12:13:59AM +0100, Andy Morris wrote:
> 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
> This certainly may have implications for computation intensive
> applications. I don't think it would overly surprise anyone if it were
> discovered that Sun's Linux JVM performs poorer than its Window's
> counterpart. I'm sure such tests have already been performed in detail
> elsewhere.
>
Andy Morris wrote:
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 sma
Mark Roach wrote:
On Thu, 2004-04-15 at 00:13 +0100, Andy Morris wrote:
... i made a simple program to count from 0
to a parameter x number of times, test data was to count 0-9 100
times. XP box did it in 3mins 10 secs, linux 5 mins 4 secs ( i did this
numerous times and results were alw
On Thu, 2004-04-15 at 00:13 +0100, Andy Morris wrote:
> ... i made a simple program to count from 0
> to a parameter x number of times, test data was to count 0-9 100
> times. XP box did it in 3mins 10 secs, linux 5 mins 4 secs ( i did this
> numerous times and results were always v sim
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 fel
On Wed, Apr 14, 2004 at 10:23:48PM +0100, Andy Morris wrote:
> 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 V
Andy Morris wrote:
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
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
On Sat, Dec 01, 2001 at 02:53:15PM -0600, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
| * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
| > I really don't need the preaching. I wanted a straight answer.
|
| Take a bench, a marker, and use the marker put a mark on the
| bench. That's a benchmark.
Hehe. This ga
* Shri Shrikumar ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
> > No, of course not. Different systems do different things well and
> > poorly. For example: Write a "benchmark" that starts and stops 10,000
> > processes and Linux will beat Windows hands-down. Write a "benchmark"
> > that starts and stops 1
At 2001-12-01T05:52:52Z, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Hi, I want to benchmark my desktop system running in Linux (Gnome, XF86
> v3.x, 2.4.5 kernel) against itself running Win98se. Is there a benchmark
> program that will work in both enviornments to give me an accurate
> benchmark?
No offense, bu
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
> I really don't need the preaching. I wanted a straight answer.
Take a bench, a marker, and use the marker put a mark on the
bench. That's a benchmark.
Straight enough for you?
Dima
--
Q276304 - Error Message: Your Password Must Be at Lea
On Sat, Dec 01, 2001 at 11:52:47AM -0500, dman wrote:
> Some programmers believe that threads should not be used at all, but
> only processes that communicate via some sort of IPC. Those
> programmers also believe that if your OS has processes that aren't
> lightweight enough for that to be feasib
On Sat, Dec 01, 2001 at 12:52:52AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Is there a benchmark program [...] to give me an accurate benchmark?
The short answer is No.
You can measure certain things, that you are interested in, but there
is always the problem (as someone mentioned) that once the benchm
On Sat, Dec 01, 2001 at 02:38:51PM +, Shri Shrikumar wrote:
| > No, of course not. Different systems do different things well and
| > poorly. For example: Write a "benchmark" that starts and stops 10,000
| > processes and Linux will beat Windows hands-down. Write a "benchmark"
| > that start
> No, of course not. Different systems do different things well and
> poorly. For example: Write a "benchmark" that starts and stops 10,000
> processes and Linux will beat Windows hands-down. Write a "benchmark"
> that starts and stops 10,000 threads and Windows will beat Linux
> hands-down (if
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> Hi, I want to benchmark my desktop system running in Linux (Gnome, XF86 v3.x,
> 2.4.5 kernel) against itself running Win98se. Is there a benchmark program
> that will work in both enviornments to give me an accurate benchmark?
Quake 3 Arena.
Of course, it might not t
> I really don't need the preaching. I wanted a straight answer. It's
> a perfectly legitimate question to want to know if one thing
> performs better than another, and if so, in what areas, and by how
> much. Human senses are inaccurate to judge things such as this at
> times, especially if di
> Hi, I want to benchmark my desktop system running in Linux (Gnome,
> XF86 v3.x, 2.4.5 kernel) against itself running Win98se. Is there
> a benchmark program that will work in both enviornments to give me
> an accurate benchmark?
>
not really. the 2 systems are so totally different it will
var
Jake Catfox asked ~
> a benchmark cross-platform between Mac and PC. So why not Windows and Linux?
~ some say, that, the [EMAIL PROTECTED] "work-unit" is a great
cross-platform measure.
The SETI web pages have some interesting Stats on CPUs/ Operating Systems
~ there are Links to {if I recall
I really don't need the preaching. I wanted a straight answer.
Au contraire. You got a rather information-packed answer that is as
straight as possible, dosed up with a bit of good-natured joshing. You
now know:
Process-cyclingUnix
Threads manipulation Windows
FP Arithmet
On Sat, Dec 01, 2001 at 01:41:33AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I really don't need the preaching. I wanted a straight answer. It's a
> perfectly legitimate question to want to know if one thing performs better
> than another, and if so, in what areas, and by how much. Human senses are
> in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
> That was not a very helpful answer at all. It's as bad as RTFM.
RTFM is good answer, even more so when it includes info on which FM to
R.
sorry, I don't know any comprehensive benchmarks... depending on what
you want to test quake might be useful.
erik
I really don't need the preaching. I wanted a straight answer. It's a
perfectly legitimate question to want to know if one thing performs better
than another, and if so, in what areas, and by how much. Human senses are
inaccurate to judge things such as this at times, especially if differences
Hi, I want to benchmark my desktop system running in Linux (Gnome, XF86 v3.x,
2.4.5 kernel) against itself running Win98se. Is there a benchmark program
that will work in both enviornments to give me an accurate benchmark?
No, of course not. Different systems do different things well and
poor
Hi, I want to benchmark my desktop system running in Linux (Gnome, XF86 v3.x,
2.4.5 kernel) against itself running Win98se. Is there a benchmark program
that will work in both enviornments to give me an accurate benchmark?
Thanks,
Deven Gallo
27 matches
Mail list logo
