Metal Guitarist Forums banner
1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
21,673 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
XW8600, 8 x 3.0Ghz Xeon processors, 4GB of RAM.

Windows 7 Ultimate Beta, 64-bit

1st Run: 10951
2nd Run: 11058

Ubuntu 8.04.1, 64-bit
1st run: 7006
2nd run: 7096

Ouch. Someone just got their ass handed to them! Granted these are synthetic benchmarks, but holy. shit.

Can't wait to run boot camp with Windows 7 on my MBP. Though I am going to have a serious amount of butt hurt if Windows is faster! :rofl:
 

·
MG.ORG Irregular
Joined
·
9,747 Posts
And that means.....what?

EDIT

BTW, on my MacBook Pro, OSX scores 3100, and Windows 7 scores 2700; still faster than XP, but not reaching OSX.
guys in Gentoo use the intel compilers and they make a huge performance increase, I was kind of joking that was the reason why it was faster. Windows is fast, people are always like 'windows sucks' or whatever but it really is fast, a lot of the APIs it has are the fastest there are.
 

·
I don't like it.
Joined
·
11,071 Posts
i wouldn't use ubuntu as a gold standard for benchmarking anyways :lol: try slackware or debian, i'd be interested to see their results
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
21,673 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
i wouldn't use ubuntu as a gold standard for benchmarking anyways :lol: try slackware or debian, i'd be interested to see their results
Debian barely benches faster than Ubuntu, if at all. Not surprising, since Ubuntu is based on it. Slackware and Gentoo are probably faster than Ubuntu but really aren't worth the trouble in a business environment. What would really be interesting to see is FreeBSD 64bit vs. The rest, since that's what OSX is based off of (actually NetBSD, I do believe).

Really, none of the major distros seem to be worth a shit these days, speed-wise. We just switched to Ubuntu from OpenSUSE because Ubuntu performed better and was a bit easier to manage, and we purchased a company that used RH, and that was underwhelming. And we're talking 8 core machines with 24gb of RAM. Sure it's fast, but not as fast as it should be.

It'll be interesting to see how fast the Mac Pro is when we get that in March. 8 cores at 3.2ghz, 16gb of ram.
 

·
Head of Agile Gestapo
Joined
·
5,675 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
32,765 Posts
XW8600, 8 x 3.0Ghz Xeon processors, 4GB of RAM.

Windows 7 Ultimate Beta, 64-bit

1st Run: 10951
2nd Run: 11058

Ubuntu 8.04.1, 64-bit
1st run: 7006
2nd run: 7096

Ouch. Someone just got their ass handed to them! Granted these are synthetic benchmarks, but holy. shit.

Can't wait to run boot camp with Windows 7 on my MBP. Though I am going to have a serious amount of butt hurt if Windows is faster! :rofl:
Wait a second. So, Microsoft has a new business strategy, namely Making Things That Don't Suck?

Whoah. Gnarly.
 

·
I am Groot
Joined
·
32,450 Posts
guys in Gentoo use the intel compilers and they make a huge performance increase, I was kind of joking that was the reason why it was faster. Windows is fast, people are always like 'windows sucks' or whatever but it really is fast, a lot of the APIs it has are the fastest there are.
Which API are you speaking of? The public API, or the private one that Microsoft maintains for its own applications, so their products appear faster than their competitors? ;)

Windows has never been all that slow at the benchmarks, and they're not all that reflective of real world performance. What Windows sucks at is resource management and context switching.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
278 Posts
For fun, I just tried this on my laptop (running Linux Mint 6 and Vista Home Premium), and Linux kicked Vista's ass. So for Windows 7 to crush Ubuntu like that... well, I'm starting to get pretty interested in Windows 7.

Of course, it's just a synthetic benchmark, but still, it's a rather dramatic turnaround.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
21,673 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 · (Edited)
Which API are you speaking of? The public API, or the private one that Microsoft maintains for its own applications, so their products appear faster than their competitors? ;)

Windows has never been all that slow at the benchmarks, and they're not all that reflective of real world performance. What Windows sucks at is resource management and context switching.
Actually, they can be reflective of real world performance, at least in this particular case. Because today we're running CFD models on both using a cross platform app (one actually developed for Linux first) and Windows is still beating the shit out of Linux. So perhaps not a global indicator, but good enough for me.

Sadly these CFD modeling apps aren't available for OS X, otherwise we'd most likely be running it on that, because the Macs still seem to perform the best.

I figured the higher the number the better (at least I hope so :lol:)...my mac scores 9470 :burns:
Yes, the higher the number, the better. See geekbench.ca and browse their db to see what that overall score is based on. It's strictly CPU/RAM bandwidth, not disk performance.

What Mac do you have? A Mac Pro of some sort, I assume.

For fun, I just tried this on my laptop (running Linux Mint 6 and Vista Home Premium), and Linux kicked Vista's ass. So for Windows 7 to crush Ubuntu like that... well, I'm starting to get pretty interested in Windows 7.

Of course, it's just a synthetic benchmark, but still, it's a rather dramatic turnaround.
I don't think 7 is directly based off of Vista like MS is saying it is. I think it's closer to Server 2008. If anyone recalls, a lot of people installed Server 2008 awhile back, and installed the "desktop experience", and it ran anywhere from 10 to 20% faster than Vista does. Add that to the fact that yesterday when I had nVidia auto-detect my machine for Win7 drivers, you'd think it'd detect it as Vista 64, but it detected it as 2008 64.

EDIT

For comparison's sake, here's a Mac Pro Geekbench benchmark that has the same exact processors as the XW8600 I've got here in the office.

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/103706

Marginally faster than 7 to the point where you couldn't even feel it.
 

·
MG.ORG Irregular
Joined
·
9,747 Posts
Which API are you speaking of? The public API, or the private one that Microsoft maintains for its own applications, so their products appear faster than their competitors? ;)

Windows has never been all that slow at the benchmarks, and they're not all that reflective of real world performance. What Windows sucks at is resource management and context switching.
directx mainly, actually that's the only one
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,768 Posts
For comparison's sake, here's a Mac Pro Geekbench benchmark that has the same exact processors as the XW8600 I've got here in the office.

Mac Pro (8-core) : Geekbench Result Browser

Marginally faster than 7 to the point where you couldn't even feel it.
So, if I understand this right, the performance difference Windows 7 (11058 points) and OS X (11124 points) is very minor.

I ran Geekbench on my system (Intel E6600) on both Linux and OS X. Here are the results:

Linux: 3283
OS X: 3282

Now, I know that performance does not scale the same way between operating systems when you add CPUs/cores, but when two benchmarks, on Windows 7 and OS X, respectively, on two nearly identical machines show a very minor difference, while my benchmarks show a negligible difference between OS X and Linux on my setup, then I feel more than a little suspicion towards your Ubuntu benchmark.
 

·
I am Groot
Joined
·
32,450 Posts
directx mainly, actually that's the only one
Yeah, I suppose things do run faster when you implement absolutely zero security measures.
 

·
badman
Joined
·
378 Posts
Yes, the higher the number, the better. See geekbench.ca and browse their db to see what that overall score is based on. It's strictly CPU/RAM bandwidth, not disk performance.

What Mac do you have? A Mac Pro of some sort, I assume.
Yeah it's a 2008 mac pro, 8-core 2.8ghz :yesway:
 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
10 Posts
Wait a second. So, Microsoft has a new business strategy, namely Making Things That Don't Suck?

Whoah. Gnarly.
Give it time. They'll *** it up with a bloated UI with all sorts of dazzling special effects that you can't turn off.
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top