Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 04:10:35 -0600 From: Michael Larabel <michael.larabel@phoronix.com> To: Michael Ross <gmx@ross.cx> Cc: FreeBSD Stable Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Current FreeBSD <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de>, Jeremy Chadwick <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com> Subject: Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server Message-ID: <4EE9C79B.7080607@phoronix.com> In-Reply-To: <op.v6iv3qe5g7njmm@michael-think> References: <4EE1EAFE.3070408@m5p.com> <CAJ-FndDniGH8QoT=kUxOQ%2BzdVhWF0Z0NKLU0PGS-Gt=BK6noWw@mail.gmail.com> <4EE2AE64.9060802@m5p.com> <4EE88343.2050302@m5p.com> <CAFHbX1%2B5PttyZuNnYot8emTn_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> <op.v6iv3qe5g7njmm@michael-think>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 12/15/2011 02:48 AM, Michael Ross wrote: > 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... > > No, the same hardware was used for each OS. In terms of the software, the stock software stack for each OS was used. -- Michael > > Regards, > > Michael > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4EE9C79B.7080607>