LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Password
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 06-27-2001, 01:01 PM   #1
e_a_olson
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: Merrimack, NH, USA
Distribution: Red Hat 7.1
Posts: 6

Rep: Reputation: 0
Question RH7.1 vs Win2k


I recently installed RH7.1 after using WIn2k for a while. IMO, RH is much, much slower than Win2k. It takes at least 5-6 seconds for Mozilla or Netscape to open. In Win2k, IE would open within 1 second of launch. The issue really isn't with my box either; I'm running a PIII 933 w/ 256Mb RAM, 256Mb swap (could that be my problem?). In general, the system just seems slower under RH than WIn2k. Anyone else think so?
 
Old 06-27-2001, 01:10 PM   #2
acid_kewpie
Moderator
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Distribution: Gentoo, RHEL, Fedora, Centos
Posts: 43,417

Rep: Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974
the netscape IE thing is nothign to do with the OS being arse. Try loading NS under win2k.....

IE is ALREADY loaded by win2k on boot as it is the shell for win2k or something equating to that. Netscape has to start from scratch. That's not exactly correct there.. but well.. near enough as it's all i know!!! :-)
 
Old 06-27-2001, 01:17 PM   #3
e_a_olson
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: Merrimack, NH, USA
Distribution: Red Hat 7.1
Posts: 6

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
The whole browser thing was just an example. Everything seems noticebly slower across the board. Even the file manager.
 
Old 06-27-2001, 01:40 PM   #4
acid_kewpie
Moderator
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Distribution: Gentoo, RHEL, Fedora, Centos
Posts: 43,417

Rep: Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974Reputation: 1974
bit of a pants example then!

I personally find most of linux runs notably faster than crappy win2k, which i run on the same box.

i've not noticaed a single thing that goes faster under win2k than linux, maybe my IM client, but that's the code.....

SSH is slower iunder windows, as is smaba mounting etc... Windows does tend to do some things better, and more consistently at times, but never faster

chris
xxxx
 
Old 06-27-2001, 01:58 PM   #5
drjimstuckinwin
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2001
Location: Manchester UK
Distribution: Mainly Fedora
Posts: 496

Rep: Reputation: 30
Have you got your kernel configured to use DMA properly? It didn't set up by default when I did my system rebuild with 2.4.2 , thus starting NS, and particularly the gigantic Star office was depressingly slow. Tried hdparm -tT /dev/hda (and hdb for my 2nd drive) and found a 3mb/sec speed. Recompiled to use default pci dma and got no better! Found the problem was in the chipset support for my board (440bx) where I also had to enable tuning of drive parameters. Now get 12mb/sec.
I still think NS is slow to load web pages though, compared to windows machine sharing the connection. Am checking out alternatives.
Jim
 
Old 06-27-2001, 01:58 PM   #6
trickykid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,149

Rep: Reputation: 234Reputation: 234Reputation: 234
Looks like this could start a war if any Windows fans came in here, but let me say something.

I ran Win2K for 30 minutes before I decided to take it back off one of my systems to replace it back with Slackware. My system runs much smoother, faster and better with Linux than with Win2K.

Oh well.
 
Old 06-27-2001, 02:39 PM   #7
e_a_olson
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: Merrimack, NH, USA
Distribution: Red Hat 7.1
Posts: 6

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
hdparm gave me 18.23 Mb/sec disk read. I dunno. Maybe I'll switch back.
 
Old 06-27-2001, 05:47 PM   #8
nabil
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2001
Location: MI, USA
Distribution: Debian Linux 100% GNU
Posts: 210

Rep: Reputation: 31
Look,
I ran win2k before, and it required me to run it on a very fast machine with tons of memory before it started to look and feel half way decent. And then I really still didn't trust it, cause I would come home at night every now and then and find my server hung..Just hung for hours not doing anything. Checking the events logs did not help out at all, except saying unexpected failiar,...no shit...
Anyway, I put Redhat on this Fast machine that I built for WIn2k and it is flying with no problems what so ever...Infact I get bored sometimes and reboot the box for no reason at all..It has not crashed at all since and it is doing alot more than what win2k did for me.
 
Old 06-27-2001, 06:50 PM   #9
HHH
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Posts: 78

Rep: Reputation: 15
Nabil,

How fast is your computer? I am getting a 1.7 GHz Pentium 4 computer. Do you think that this is fast enought to support Win2000 and Linux in one box? My mem is 1024MB. Is this large enough?
 
Old 06-27-2001, 07:08 PM   #10
nabil
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2001
Location: MI, USA
Distribution: Debian Linux 100% GNU
Posts: 210

Rep: Reputation: 31
HHH,
Well mine when I built it 8 months ago, had dual PIII-500 512 cache on Asus main board. 2 scsi seagate cheatas 10000 RPM drives running on Adaptech 29160 scsi controller with 1024 ECC 133MHZ Micron memory.
I think mine was well balanced fast system.

In you case you will be lacking SMP support as in dual processor. Usually servers need that sometimes. Also Drives need to be scsi for fast operation without overloading CPU time. Memory is good although it is always better to have more..

ANyway, I am sure you system will be running quite nicely with Linux and Win2k although don't be surprised if you See a bule screen every now and then when running Windows.
 
Old 06-27-2001, 07:58 PM   #11
HHH
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Posts: 78

Rep: Reputation: 15
Nabil,

Checking back with my computer "specs", I found out I have 60 GB internal hard drive. and a Pentium 4 on an Asus main board. I don't have any fancy stuff like Cheetahs though...
Anyway, have you ever tried doing dual boot stuff? If you did, how'd you do it?
 
Old 06-27-2001, 08:39 PM   #12
nabil
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2001
Location: MI, USA
Distribution: Debian Linux 100% GNU
Posts: 210

Rep: Reputation: 31
Basically have 2 drives or 2 different patitions on 1 drive, Install Win2k on one side and then go back and install Linux on other side...I think Linux will then let you see a menu to boot either to Linux or dos "win2k". May have to do some adjustments in Linux Boot loader or LILO to get Windows to boot from menu afterward. other People do it the other way around and use a Linux boot disk to boot into Linux. I personally don't like to support this, but there are alot of Docs on the net to do this.

Hope this helped you any at all.
 
Old 06-28-2001, 12:19 PM   #13
DoubleLetter
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
Distribution: Mandrake Linux 10.1
Posts: 132

Rep: Reputation: 15
Re: RH7.1 vs Win2k

Hello,

I installed Red Hat Linux 7.1 a few days back. ( Incorrect installation since I lost win2000 and all my precious data )

But the speed, while definitely less thatn that of win2000, is not as bad as what you describe.

My pc's a celeron pentium 2, 400 mhz, built-in vga card...
Passable.

Regards,
A.A
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
win2k rh7.3 triple boot SADANA Linux - General 1 10-14-2002 10:02 AM
RH7 + Win2k + ADSL router plisken Linux - Security 1 02-07-2002 04:01 PM
Dual Boot: RH7.2/Win2K - I'm stuck pcorchary Linux - Software 2 12-14-2001 10:07 AM
Win2K/RH7.1 Dual, RH won't boot from boot disk after install marktaff Linux - Software 4 08-24-2001 06:29 PM
Am dual booting RH7 & Win2K.Need Help! HHH Linux - Software 29 07-17-2001 02:13 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:58 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration