Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

[O. Hartmann]

On 12/16/11 07:44, Joe Holden wrote:
> Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 2:32 AM, O. Hartmann
>> <ohartman at zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>>> Just saw this shot benchmark on Phoronix dot com today:
>>>
>>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTAyNzA
>>>
>> it might be worth highlighting that despite Oracle Linux 6.1 Server is
>> using a kernel + compiler almost 2 years old, it still manages to
>> out-perform the bleeding edge FreeBSD :-)
>>
> serenity# gcc --version
> gcc (GCC) 4.2.1 20070831 patched [FreeBSD]
> 
> serenity# uname -r
> 9.0-RC3
> 

For the underlying OS, as far as I know, the compiler hasn't as much
impact as on userland software since autovectorization and other neat
things are not used during system build.

From my experience using gcc 4.2 or 4.4/4.5 does not have an impact
beyond 3% when SSE isn't explicetly enforced.

More interesting is the performance gain due to the architecture. I
think it would be very easy for M. Larabel to repeat this benchmark with
a "bleeding edge"  Ubuntu or Suse as well. And since FreeBSD 9.0 can be
compiled with CLANG, it should be possible to compare both also with
"bleeding edge" compilers, say FreeBSD 9/CLANG, Ubuntu 12/gcc 4.6.2.


>> Now, from what I've read so far in this thread, it seems that a lot of
>> people are still in abnegation...
>>
>> my 0.2c,
>>  - Arnaud
>>
>>> 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. The overall image can't help over
>>> the fact that in C-Ray FreeBSD is better performing.
>>>
>>> From the compiler, I'd like say there couldn't be a drop of more than 10
>>> - 15% in performance - but not 10 or 100 times.
>>>
>>> I'm just thinking about the discussion of SCHED_ULE and all the saur
>>> spots we discussed when I stumbled over the test.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Oliver

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/attachments/20111216/c11c4ce3/signature.pgp