From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Dec 15 09:06:28 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13EC9106566C;
	Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:06:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gmx@ross.cx)
Received: from www81.your-server.de (www81.your-server.de [213.133.104.81])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE3298FC13;
	Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:06:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [188.108.237.120] (helo=michael-think)
	by www81.your-server.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <gmx@ross.cx>)
	id 1Rb6zt-0001bL-6P; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:49:01 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes
To: "Jeremy Chadwick" <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com>,
	freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, "Current FreeBSD"
	<freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
References: <4EE1EAFE.3070408@m5p.com>
	<CAJ-FndDniGH8QoT=kUxOQ+zdVhWF0Z0NKLU0PGS-Gt=BK6noWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EE2AE64.9060802@m5p.com> <4EE88343.2050302@m5p.com>
	<CAFHbX1+5PttyZuNnYot8emTn_AWkABdJCvnpo5rcRxVXj0ypJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EE933C6.4020209@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
	<CAPjTQNEJDE17TLH-mDrG_-_Qa9R5N3mSeXSYYWtqz_DFidzYQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20111215024249.GA13557@icarus.home.lan>
	<4EE9A2A0.80607@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:48:52 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "Michael Ross" <gmx@ross.cx>
Message-ID: <op.v6iv3qe5g7njmm@michael-think>
In-Reply-To: <4EE9A2A0.80607@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
User-Agent: Opera Mail/11.60 (Win32)
X-Authenticated-Sender: gmx@ross.cx
X-Virus-Scanned: Clear (ClamAV 0.97.3/14124/Wed Dec 14 16:10:02 2011)
Cc: FreeBSD Stable Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1
	Server
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:06:28 -0000

Am 15.12.2011, 08:32 Uhr, schrieb O. Hartmann  
<ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de>:

> Just saw this shot benchmark on Phoronix dot com today:
>
> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTAyNzA
>
> It may be worth to discuss the sad performance of FBSD in some parts of
> the benchmark. A difference of a factor 10 or 100 is simply far beyond
> disapointing, it is more than inacceptable and by just reading those
> benchmarks, I'd like to drop thinking of using FreeBSD even as a backend
> server in scientific and business environments. In detail, some of the
> SciMark benches look disappointing.

Why SciMark?

SciMark FreeBSD : Oracle, Mflops

Composite       884.79 :  844.03 (Faster: FreeBSD)
FFT             236.17 :  213.65 (Faster: FreeBSD)
Jacobi          970.76 :  974.84 (Faster: Oracle)
Monte Carlo     443.00 :  246.27 (Faster: FreeBSD)
Sparse Matrix  1213.64 : 1228.22 (Faster: Oracle)
Dense LU       1560.39 : 1557.18	(Faster: FreeBSD)


The threaded I/O results (Oracle outperforms FreeBSD by x10 on one, by  
x100 on another test)
or the disc TPS ( 486 : 3526 ) sure look worse and are worth looking into.


Anyway these tests were performed on different hardware, FWIW.
And with different filesystems, different compilers, different GUIs...



Regards,

Michael