LinuxQuestions.org
Visit the LQ Articles and Editorials section
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 09-27-2012, 09:24 PM   #1
parcox
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jan 2007
Location: Pontianak, Indonesia
Distribution: Slackware64-14.0
Posts: 26

Rep: Reputation: 5
Slackware's performance is poor compared to other "big" Linux distribution


Hi,
I just read an article[1] from phoronix about performance comparison on several larger Linux distribution and I'm really surprise to see the result that Slackware performs "bad" compared to the other distro. What do you think guys?

[1] http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=17688
 
Old 09-27-2012, 09:28 PM   #2
vharishankar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,142
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 121Reputation: 121
deleted.

Last edited by vharishankar; 11-02-2012 at 12:21 PM.
 
Old 09-27-2012, 09:39 PM   #3
unSpawn
Moderator
 
Registered: May 2001
Posts: 27,279
Blog Entries: 54

Rep: Reputation: 2852Reputation: 2852Reputation: 2852Reputation: 2852Reputation: 2852Reputation: 2852Reputation: 2852Reputation: 2852Reputation: 2852Reputation: 2852Reputation: 2852
Quote:
Originally Posted by parcox View Post
What do you think guys?
I think that if you want to truly understand the results you have to find out which kernel and what user land SW versions are used, which patches were applied (if any) and what the effect of those is on performance.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 09-27-2012, 09:50 PM   #4
T3slider
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2007
Distribution: Slackware64-14.1
Posts: 2,252

Rep: Reputation: 631Reputation: 631Reputation: 631Reputation: 631Reputation: 631Reputation: 631
I'd be interested to see benchmarks with standardized kernels. There was a regression present in 3.2.23 as seen here, but I'm not sure if it affected performance or just reporting. These tests also do nothing to determine the possible cause of lacking performance which is unfortunate. The table of information on page 1 is also inconsistent with testing on the same hardware, so I'm not sure what to make of the tests. It should be noted that it is very poor form, and certainly bad journalism, to compare a pre-release version of Slackware with fully released distros, though I'm not sure whether or not there would be a difference now (at least the kernel version has been bumped in Slackware). See this thread.
 
Old 09-27-2012, 10:05 PM   #5
manwichmakesameal
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2006
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 800

Rep: Reputation: 100Reputation: 100
All I have to say about the benchmarks: they don't matter to me. I have tried multiple distros on my machines and I feel that Slack runs the fastest (and most stable). I know its subjective, but that's my test.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 09-27-2012, 10:13 PM   #6
foobarz
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2010
Distribution: slackware64-current
Posts: 48

Rep: Reputation: 10
seems like failed attempt to troll against slackware

Forget the benchmarking results and such comments like "oddly disappointing," because it is really splitting hairs for the most part. The take-away is that slackware is there, and it's a popular distro! Slackware didn't seem so popular a few years ago and would not get mentioned often, but it's popularity has appeared to pick up. More and more people have gone through the undecided phase of trying many distros, but come back to slackware later. The slackware "KISS" approach, keeping slackware-specific scripts and tools simple, allows the user to feel that slackware is their own distro that is easy to reconfigure, fix, and feel confident to use.

I'm suspicious of measuring technology on performance only. Often, gains in performance come by cutting corners on proper sanity/error checking and using other less-safe modes of operation. Maybe slackware compiles with less compiler optimization or assumes a more basic CPU feature set than some other distros? In the end, a little lower performance can sometimes mean better compatibility and stability. This is my opinion, not intended to start a big debate on this.
 
4 members found this post helpful.
Old 09-27-2012, 10:16 PM   #7
shadowsnipes
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,441

Rep: Reputation: 70
I'm guessing the writer/tester did not read CHANGES_AND_HINTS.TXT and was probably using the huge kernel. Other little post-install actions may also have been left out.

There's a lot of variations in the DE/WMs that was not considered.

Additionally, I could care less how those tests run on an i7 Core proc w/ 8GB RAM. I'd like to see the results on a P4 w/ 1GB RAM because that's basically the ballpark of what I typically use currently. I guarantee Ubuntu, CentOS, and Fedora with Unity/GNOME would not fair quite as well!
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 09-27-2012, 10:28 PM   #8
chrisretusn
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: Philippines
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 478

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I think it is just another meaningless test. Not any huge differences that one would see during normal use. It's certainly not going to convince me to switch to a "faster" distribution. Slackware is fast in my book that's all that matters.
 
Old 09-27-2012, 10:32 PM   #9
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0
Posts: 3,188
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 825Reputation: 825Reputation: 825Reputation: 825Reputation: 825Reputation: 825Reputation: 825
Benchmarks are bullshit compared to real usage scenarios.

Slackware may not be the fastest Linux distribution, but it's the most stable distribution you can find outside of Linux From Scratch.

Once you use Slackware, there are no other distributions... besides LFS.
 
Old 09-27-2012, 11:00 PM   #10
hitest
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Prince Rupert, B.C., Canada
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD
Posts: 4,169

Rep: Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
Benchmarks are bullshit compared to real usage scenarios.

Slackware may not be the fastest Linux distribution, but it's the most stable distribution you can find outside of Linux From Scratch.

Once you use Slackware, there are no other distributions... besides LFS.
Agreed. Our distro has legendary stability and security; Slackware earned its reputation. There is no substitute.
Slackware!
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 09-27-2012, 11:16 PM   #11
bosth
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2011
Posts: 225

Rep: Reputation: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
Benchmarks are bullshit compared to real usage scenarios.

Slackware may not be the fastest Linux distribution, but it's the most stable distribution you can find outside of Linux From Scratch.
Benchmarks are one test and stability is another test. It's not wrong to test performance.

(Note: I have no idea if these benchmarks were done properly.)
 
Old 09-27-2012, 11:16 PM   #12
parcox
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jan 2007
Location: Pontianak, Indonesia
Distribution: Slackware64-14.0
Posts: 26

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 5
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post

Slackware may not be the fastest Linux distribution, but it's the most stable distribution you can find outside of Linux From Scratch.

Once you use Slackware, there are no other distributions... besides LFS.

Indeed, I'm totally agree with you
 
Old 09-27-2012, 11:20 PM   #13
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0
Posts: 3,188
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 825Reputation: 825Reputation: 825Reputation: 825Reputation: 825Reputation: 825Reputation: 825
I know this isn't normally done, but this deserves a fitting Meme...

27480535.jpg
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 09-28-2012, 12:54 AM   #14
Totoro-kun
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2010
Location: Kaunas, Lithuania
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 169

Rep: Reputation: 49
Wow, what a great idea to benchmark OS in development stage against stable competitors!
 
Old 09-28-2012, 12:59 AM   #15
Ilgar
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Distribution: Slackware 14.1, Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 923

Rep: Reputation: 93
It's probable that the version of Slackware used there was hit by some of sort regression in the kernel, and let's not forget the "i486" thing (although it shouldn't make that much of a difference). Still, it doesn't imply anything about stability and those differences are not things that once can notice during normal desktop use anyway.
 
  


Reply

Tags
benchmarking, performance


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
Lightest "jukebox" app/player for Debian? lite compared to rhytmbox/amarok? linus72 Linux - General 4 11-02-2009 08:55 PM
linux distribution supporting "2.6.18-8.1.10.el5" or "2.6.16.21-0.8-smp" mrpc_cambodia Linux - Kernel 3 10-08-2009 02:43 AM
Shouldn't "Slackware64" Become just "Slackware" and 32-bit Become "Slackware32"? foodown Slackware 6 06-23-2009 01:24 PM
Slackware = "most unix-like" distribution ? caustic386 Slackware 41 04-08-2009 08:26 PM
Poor 3d performance with ATI Radeon 7500LE desipte "Direct rendering enabled" tallman Linux - Hardware 5 06-16-2004 11:31 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:51 AM.

Main Menu
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
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration