October 25, 2010 Web performance on Ubuntu and Windows
People say Linux is fast. People say Ubuntu is fast. What are these people talking about exactly?
Well, it’s not the browser performance. Have a look at the performance results from Peacekeeper.
Side by side - Peacekeeper results for Ubuntu 10.04 and Windows XP
I ran these on a 6 year old laptop, an old centrino 1.7Ghz with a shitty ATI. Just for completeness sake, since it doesn’t really matter. I’m willing to assert that you will have similar results on any machine.
Add to this the shitty graphics drivers to slow the rendering down, and the ubber-shitty flash for the ultimate cherry on top of the cake.
So you see gentlemen, when you say linux is “faster” … well, it’s really not that simple. On the server? sure. On the desktop, on the applications that matter to the desktop user… it’s not faster. At all.
No wonder Ubuntu drains my battery much faster. Not only isn’t powersaving optimal for all my hardware because of inexistent manufacturer support, but the applications themselves burn much more cpu.
BONUS POINTS: Notice the font rendering in XP. Now Ubuntu. Now XP. Holy shit.
PS – A real post in what? Over a year? Holy shitz!
Tags: benchmark, chrome, chromium, difference, firefox, google, javascript, opera, peacekeeper, performance, rendering, ubuntu, windows
- 2 comments
- Posted under bugs, software
Permalink #
Klaus Zimmermann
said
Linux is faster, still.
Why, you ask?
Easy.
Linux is just as fast as you make it. There are alternatives (Openbox, LXDE, Ratpoison) that are infinitely as fast as any Windows you can dream of. Oh, so you have shitty graphics on a 6-year-old machine running ATI?
=============================
I LOL’D!
=============================
Do yourself and everyone a favor: update the system, and carefully shove your left thumb as deep as you can up your ass. While you’re at it, maybe suck a dick or two from the Linux developers. Fucking Piece of shit…
Attentiously,
Klaus
Permalink #
anonymousbloke
said
So let me see if I get this straight. I benchmark browsers on XP and on Ubuntu and Ubuntu is clearly slower. That makes me a fucking piece of shit? Fuck you asshole. You can go suck a bag of dicks for all I care. It’s nitwits like you that make linux look bad. This endless fanboyism sickens me to the core. Why can’t you admit that linux has problems?
Hey, let me answer that. Because you don’t know SHIT about linux or computers. You want me to go such a dick or two from kernel developers? Because I said linux runs poorly on desktops? Sit down, motherfucker, causa I’m gonna lay down some serious wisdom. Have you ever noticed that when you make a file transfer your whole computer comes down to a halt? No, you haven’t, because you’re the sort of dipshit that solves performance issues by upgrading hardware. But do you know why that happens? When you make a file transfer, you’re overloading the cpu with interrupts from the disk controller. The softirqs that process these interrupts run in interrupt context and are non-preemptible. Not only that, but they are one of the highest priority softirqs in the system.
That went right over your head. But allow me to continue. Do you know what that causes, motherfucker? It causes higher throughput at the cost of user space starvation. On servers this is great, on desktops it means your interface is freezing because a file transfer is going on. And do you know why this happens in the first place? Because linux development is steared towards enterprise goals. And that means servers, motherfucker.
Let me ask you another question. Do you know why I know this? Because I’m doing my master’s thesis in linux and I’ve conducted research, ran performance tests and analysed the results. Soon, I’ll publish them. What have YOU done for linux, motherfucker? Deny problems and insult people that point them out. It’s fucking sad man. Fucking SAD.