This is just a comparison of graphics speed
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| phsolide May 03, 2010 3:23 PM EDT |
This whole thing just compares graphics speeds. Graphics cards are notorious for not having good linux support, especially latest and greatest. It does not do a general purpose sort of benchmark, like lmbench (http://lmbench.sourceforge.net/) did/does. Lmbench seems unix-a-like specific, but it would be interesting to run it under multiple OSes on the same hardware. Without something like lmbench, I personally would hesitate to say "Windows 7 is faster" than J. Random Linux Distro. |
| techiem2 May 03, 2010 3:47 PM EDT |
They did mention at the end that this is part one and that non-gaming benchmarks will be coming up. |
| Sander_Marechal May 03, 2010 4:43 PM EDT |
Yup. I'll be waiting for the non-gaming benchmarks. What's interesting about these tests is that it clearly shows that gaming on Linux can be pretty much on-par with Windows. At least that's one myth dispelled. |
| azerthoth May 03, 2010 5:11 PM EDT |
Good point Sander. I would like to see the follow on performance with more than ext4 in *buntu. Phoronix has listed articles quoting ext3 generally out performing ext4. |
| herzeleid May 05, 2010 2:40 AM EDT |
It's basically a benchmark between the super duper proprietary intel driver for ms windows and the FOSS intel driver for linux. Now we know which one they've invested more effort into. In contrast, the nvidia drivers, which are available for a number of platforms including linux, solaris, freebsd, and ms windoze, yield similar perfomance on windows vs linux - probably due to the fact that all supported platforms use what is essentially the same nvidia binary blob, differing only in the platform specific "glue code" or "wrapper" for the binary blob. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!