Revisiting Linux Part 1: A Look at Ubuntu 8.04
by Ryan Smith on August 26, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Linux
CPU Benchmarks
We’ll start our short look at Ubuntu’s performance with our CPU intensive benchmarks. Up first is SuperPi, a single-threaded pi-calculating benchmark. Here we time how long it takes to calculate Pi to 1 million digits.
We ran this test several times more than usual just to make sure we weren’t seeing any kind of error. The Linux version of SuperPi really is about 30% faster than the Vista version. Keep this in mind, this will be an important point later.
Meanwhile the situation for LAME is inverted. Vista outscores the Linux version by nearly 20%.
Using the cross-platform X264-based Handbreak for our video encoding test, Vista once again pulls ahead of Linux.
Once more Vista is ahead by a large margin.
From what we can tell, there’s little-if-any innate performance advantage to Vista or Linux in these benchmarks. Our working theory is that the performance difference comes down to the compiler used. Many Linux applications are compiled with GCC, while for Windows it’s either the Visual Studio compiler, or Intel’s own compiler (which is also available for Linux). There’s also a matter of compiler settings, as we saw in our quick breakout of Firefox benchmarks.
Meanwhile SuperPi uses a lot of hand-rolled code, although we’re still not sure why it’s outperforming Vista on Linux by as much as it is.
To shed a little more light on this idea of compiler performance, we have a few benchmarks of Windows application performance under Ubuntu through Wine.
Here we see a most amazing thing: Ubuntu is outperforming Windows at running Windows applications! As we’ve removed the influence of compilers the Photoshop results are particularly interesting. From what we can tell it’s normally as fast under Linux as it is Vista, however there seems to be a short gap of low-CPU usage when running it under Vista that doesn’t occur when running it under Ubuntu. As a result Ubuntu finishes a few seconds earlier.
There are a number of conditional cases that mean that applications running under Wine don’t always match or beat Windows performance, but in our tests there’s no performance hit to using Wine to run Windows applications.
These results also lend a great deal of support to the idea that there’s a significant difference in performance between the two operating systems due to their compilers. This goes particularly for the LAME benchmark, where the performance gap melts away under Wine. This is something we’re going to have to look in to in the future.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
195 Comments
View All Comments
LittleMic - Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_symbolic_link">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_symbolic_linkWell, Windows 2000 had symbolic links for a long time :-p (only for directory until Vista though)
ekul - Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - link
ntfs has symlinks but the windows shell can't create or manipulate them. Pretty pointless. MS can (and does) use them in vista/7 but you can't make your ownEeqmcsq - Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - link
"hint: symlinks are your best friend. My home dir is littered with links to places on the filesystem I visit a lot to avoid a lot of clicking/typing"I use Gnome's bookmarks for that. Those bookmarks even include SMB shares on my other computers.
ekul - Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - link
gnome bookmarks are very handy I just find symlinks to be more flexible since they work regardless of gnome vs kde, gtk vs qt and gui vs cli. Even wine can take advantage of themjigglywiggly - Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - link
one more thing you should have covered is battery life on laptops. Linux in general is pretty awful at managing battery life. Just web browsing 4 hrs on Vista on my vostro 1310(not using 7) but with Ubuntu 2 1/2. It's a huge difference, but oh well.Ryan Smith - Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - link
Laptops are out of our domain, that would be Jarred. If this two-part series is successful, I'll see what I can do about talking him in to putting some Ubuntu (or any Linux for that matter) battery benchmarks in. But I'm told a complete workup takes a while.strikeback03 - Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - link
On my Thinkpad T43, battery life is essentially equal between XP and Ubuntu. Ubuntu may even be slightly better, though I have never bothered with a formal test to put real numbers on both. Have you looked at whether the processor is throttling down properly or not while in Ubuntu?sprockkets - Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - link
"Now we have yet to touch on hardware accelerated playback, which is something we’re going to hold off on until we take a look at Ubuntu 9.04. Linux does not have a common media framework like Windows and Mac OS X have DirectShow/DXVA and QuickTime respectively. Rather the desktop environment that Ubuntu is based off of (GNOME) includes a lesser framework called GStreamer, which is closer to a basic collection of codecs and an interface to them. As such hardware accelerated playback is not as easy to do under Ubuntu as it is under Windows and Mac OS X. We’ll take look at the APIs and the software for this in our look at Ubuntu 9.04."Well, not exactly. There is this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VaAPI">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VaAPI, which is not exactly widespread yet. nVidia's VDPAU, which provides hardware acceleration for h.264 and if you have the latest version of PureVideo in your card, it does VC-1 as well. It can work with this or alone as well.
Also, while it is wacky that bin or binaries are in one spot, and lib or libraries are in another, and anything you install is in a /usr/lib/local, it does keep all related files in one spot. Keeping all your libraries registered as packages also makes it easy to repair.
Also, one click installs are possible on openSuSE as well, though it does involve a small gui process and adding a repository as well. But doesn't any program require this?
Also, I believe your problem with SMB shares is something I run into as well, but only on GNOME. On KDE, browsing shares is quite normal. Since I never bother mounting the share, I can't directly access it without KDE caching the file locally.
Isn't /home/$Your Name$ intuitive as to where your stuff would be? That is very nice, as I can keep my stuff separate from the OS, thus I can reformat the OS partition without having to touch my data. Imagine reinstalling Windows and finding all your apps working exactly as before with no work. Can OSX do that (not rhetorical)?
Ryan Smith - Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - link
VDPAU is something we'll specifically be covering in the Part 2; in fact it's what I'm working on at this moment.GeorgeH - Wednesday, August 26, 2009 - link
I'm sure the comment section will quickly be swamped with quibbles, so I just wanted to say that I found this article to be very informative, accurate (WRT my own Ubuntu experiences), and thorough. Kudos - now it's time to ask for a raise. :)