FreeBSD 8.0 Performance (at Phoronix)
mav at FreeBSD.org
Tue Dec 1 06:01:23 UTC 2009
David Naylor wrote:
> Phoronix recently published a comparative benchmark for FreeBSD 7.2/8.0
> against Linux and OpenSolaris. I would like to bring some of the good and bad
> to light (in the hopes that the developers with the correct expertise will be
> The tests were performed with a 'standard' installation of FreeBSD on a Lenovo
> ThinkPad T61.
> I've tried to eliminate tests who's performance is a result of compiler
> differences and/or 3rd party applications and tests who's statistical
> significance are not so strong (subjective guess).
> Improvements for FreeBSD 8.0 vs 7.2:
> - 7-Zip Compression (page 3)
> - Timed MAFFT Alignment (page 5)
> - GraphicsMagick (page 5)
> - Threaded IO (64MB Random Write - 32 threads) (page 7)
> - Threaded IO (64MB Read - 32 threads) (page 7)
> Regressions for FreeBSD 8.0 vs 7.2:
> - Gzip compressions of a 2GB file (page 3)
> - C-Ray (page 4)
> - Threaded IO (64MB Write - 4 threads) (page 7)
> - Threaded IO (64MB Write - 32 threads) (page 7)
> Poor performance relative to Linux and OpenSolaris
> - Threaded IO (especially random writes) (page 7)
> - OpenSSL (RSA 4096bit) (page 8)
> - PostMark (disk transaction) (page 8)
> It appears that threaded activity on UFS does not fair well against Linux/ext4
> and OpenSolaris/ZFS. Phoronix intends to do a comparative test against
> FreeBSD and OpenSolaris on ZFS.
Threaded I/O activity could get much benefit from NCQ-aware disk driver.
It is not included in default FreeBSD kernel, but it would be nice to
In power-consumption tests I believe FreeBSD could behave much better if
properly tuned. Unluckily our default installation doesn't use any
power-saving technologies. Six month ago I have shown on list how laptop
power consumption can be cut in half.
More information about the freebsd-current