linux ppc vs linux alpha vs linux x86?

linux ppc vs linux alpha vs linux x86?

Post by guy-ji » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



does anyone have/know where to get benchmarks
comparing the performance of linux on various
processors? i want to know how much better
linux PPC is than everything else :-)

--
[signature:]
my real email address is at usa dot net
Choose Any System But the Pay$tation2!
you cannot spell conservative without "CON"

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

 
 
 

linux ppc vs linux alpha vs linux x86?

Post by Steve Wolf » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


Quote:> does anyone have/know where to get benchmarks
> comparing the performance of linux on various
> processors? i want to know how much better
> linux PPC is than everything else :-)

  If you're already decided, why bother with real-world numbers?

steve

 
 
 

linux ppc vs linux alpha vs linux x86?

Post by Erik van Rood » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



Quote:>> does anyone have/know where to get benchmarks
>> comparing the performance of linux on various
>> processors? i want to know how much better
>> linux PPC is than everything else :-)
>   If you're already decided, why bother with real-world numbers?

  Volatile mix of groups to post that in seems to be one of the
factors. Better duck ;)

Erik

 
 
 

linux ppc vs linux alpha vs linux x86?

Post by Tony Hammit » Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:43:08


I've got all three here, and it depends on what you're doing =-]

The Alphas and PPC boxes are very good at floating point math, since
both of them have architecture optimized libraries and lots of floating
point registers.  My PPC box is just a 2x225MHz 604e but it routinely
stomps my 2x450MHz PIII at FP.

Integer wise, it's a toss-up.  About everything does equally well
MHz for MHz, so the more the merrier.

Application support, on the other hand, for i386 is much better than
for either Alpha or PPC.  People typically only compile for i386, so
lots of things have to be recompiled for PPC and Alpha.  The PPC
being MSB byte ordered can sometimes throw simple applications off.

I don't think that there is anything that PPC is the best at, but
it can compete with all of the other architectures very well.  This
is coming from a long-time Mac bigot.  But now I've become more of a
UNIX bigot and only use the Mac for printing and DNET OGR crunching.

Since LinuxPPC doesn't support MY multiple processor configuration,
I've stopped using it for anything but testing.  The box also has
old, flaky memory so I can't compile anything reliably.  If Apple
would just support ECC memory, I might think of running a MacOS X
server, but since they don't, it's not even an option.  Only an
extreme optimist would trust normal memory.

This post is 100% my opinion, feel free to post your own.

Regards,

Tony Hammitt



> >> does anyone have/know where to get benchmarks
> >> comparing the performance of linux on various
> >> processors? i want to know how much better
> >> linux PPC is than everything else :-)

> >   If you're already decided, why bother with real-world numbers?

>   Volatile mix of groups to post that in seems to be one of the
> factors. Better duck ;)

> Erik

 
 
 

linux ppc vs linux alpha vs linux x86?

Post by guy-ji » Thu, 28 Sep 2000 10:36:28




Quote:>   If you're already decided, why bother with real-world numbers?

just trying to be funny. sheesh.

--
[signature:]
my real email address is at usa dot net
Choose Any System But the Pay$tation2!
you cannot spell conservative without "CON"

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

 
 
 

linux ppc vs linux alpha vs linux x86?

Post by Jeff Stur » Thu, 28 Sep 2000 13:47:56



> does anyone have/know where to get benchmarks
> comparing the performance of linux on various
> processors? i want to know how much better
> linux PPC is than everything else :-)

You can look at SPEC.  There are many types of benchmarks possible
(graphics, 3D, compuatational, stream, ray tracing, to name a few).  You
need to be more specific regarding what sort of benchmarks you are
interested in.

Incidentally, Linux itself has little to do with it.  Most benchmarks
don't reflect kernel performance.  Performance is usually constrained by
the hardware.  Unless the app is very system call-intensive, the kernel
just gets out of the way.

I can tell you one thing: x86 blows at PIC.  PIC is necessary for
building ELF relocatable shared libraries.  Essentially everything in
/lib (libm, libc, etc.) is built with PIC, and on x86 that can cause a
loss of up to 30% in performance according to my tests.  Basically x86
is already register-starved and PIC aggravates the problem.

In constrast, PPC and Alpha are both ELF targets and don't suffer from
PIC.  If I had to choose my favorite architectures for running Linux,
Alpha comes in first, SPARC/PPC would probably tie for 2nd, x86 dead
last (well, maybe ahead of MIPS).

And the jury is still out on IA-64...

Jeff

 
 
 

linux ppc vs linux alpha vs linux x86?

Post by bgee » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


 >I can tell you one thing: x86 blows at PIC.  PIC is necessary for
 >building ELF relocatable shared libraries.

Ok, so what's PIC?

My acronym converter offers these possiblilities:

        PIC     - Pilot In Command
        PIC     - Plastic-Insulated Cable
        PIC     - Primary Independent Carrier

--
<> Robert Geer & Donna Tomky |          ||||                            ||||    <>


<>   Albuquerque, NM  USA    |      ||||                            ||||    <>

 
 
 

linux ppc vs linux alpha vs linux x86?

Post by Grant Edwar » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> >I can tell you one thing: x86 blows at PIC.  PIC is necessary for
> >building ELF relocatable shared libraries.

>Ok, so what's PIC?

Position Independant Code.

It's far easier to impliment shared libraries if the code in
the libraries is position-independant: it will run the same no
matter where in memory you plunk it down.

--
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow!  Why are these
                                  at               athletic shoe salesmen
                               visi.com            following me??

 
 
 

linux ppc vs linux alpha vs linux x86?

Post by Josef Kolbitsc » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


   i have running a mac/ppc-601 and it is _very_slow_, but that's
   most probably due to the graphics-support: i'm using fbdev ...

   my alpha/pc-164 is a nice, quite fast machine. so i'd say it is
   faster. i don't really see why _linux_ should be faster on any
   architecture. i would say the computer as such is faster, but not
   linux on that computer.

   -- josef.

--
---------------------------------------------------------
 josef kolbitsch

 > http://www.sbox.tu-graz.ac.at/home/s/skol
---------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

1. Linux vs OS2 vs NT vs Win95 vs Multics vs PDP11 vs BSD geeks

        Every machine and operating system has got its useful
purpose...

        I see no point in argueing with people which OS is better, and
which is worse, and what will survive and what wont...

        The bottom line is obviously the best OS is the one that make
the end user most productive.    Ive used quite a variety of software
from intel, ibm, MS, sun, GNU, DEC/compaq, etc,   and everything OS
has got its UPz and DOWnz, so depending on what you want to do with it
yer machine, probably determines what OS you run.

        So lets cut to the chase -  OS bashing is a waste of time,
and most of the time I'd say the person putting it down just hasn't
seen that particular OS's potential,  or should I say speciality....

      Hell,  Plan 9 has even got some interesting features.. <snicker>

       And all PC users know,  that no matter what use on a day to day
basis on the PC, that one day you will need to boot good ole ancient
DOS to do something...

2. Background color.

3. G4-PPC vs ALPHA vs 8086 vs Merced

4. Test : Please ignore it.

5. Linux Advocacy - Linux vs Windows 2000 vs Be vs OS/2

6. Domain Problems - Someone else is aliased against my domain

7. Benchmarks x86 Solaris vs Linux and Solaris 2.6 x86 vs sparc

8. Shared Libraries and exception Handling

9. Linux/alpha vs. 2.4.20 and ISO9660 vs long file names

10. Interactive vs. Solaris x86 vs. Linux?

11. Linux vs FreeBSD vs Solaris for x86 ?

12. Linux vs FreeBSD vs Solaris Unix for x86

13. Short Summary of Linux vs. Win9X vs. Mac vs. ???