LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
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 08-25-2014, 09:50 AM   #1
enine
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Distribution: Slackʍɐɹǝ
Posts: 1,486
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 283Reputation: 283Reputation: 283
Benchmarking 32 v 64 bit Slackware


I was reading some old threads about the origin of Slack64 and see that Pat included the 64bit build because it benchmarked faster. My own experience so far 64bit was a good bit slower on an older system with 2G of RAM, in fact slow enough to be unuseable.
I've ordered some new hardware and was wondering what would be a good way for me to get some #'s to compare, i.e. whats a good benchmark utility I can test with.
This is my first non-laptop in probably 10 years as well as first AMD processor so its somewhat a big change for myself.

This will be a system for the wife and kids to use in the living room so I don't want to run one for a couple months then swap to another.

Last edited by enine; 08-25-2014 at 10:08 AM.
 
Old 08-25-2014, 10:27 AM   #2
keefaz
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 6,616

Rep: Reputation: 890Reputation: 890Reputation: 890Reputation: 890Reputation: 890Reputation: 890Reputation: 890
Quote:
whats a good benchmark utility I can test with.
Code:
cd /usr/src/linux
make allyesconfig
time make
 
Old 08-25-2014, 10:32 AM   #3
business_kid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Ireland
Distribution: Slackware, Slarm64 & Android
Posts: 17,092

Rep: Reputation: 2483Reputation: 2483Reputation: 2483Reputation: 2483Reputation: 2483Reputation: 2483Reputation: 2483Reputation: 2483Reputation: 2483Reputation: 2483Reputation: 2483
If it's any use, I went into this. A good cpu test is a kernel build. Use tyhe same config, and source, and run 'time make -j4' or less.

The 64 bit kernel should be able to discard all tweaks and workarounds for older buggy chipsets, and use 64 bit optimizations.
 
Old 08-25-2014, 11:00 AM   #4
GazL
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: May 2008
Posts: 7,068

Rep: Reputation: 5218Reputation: 5218Reputation: 5218Reputation: 5218Reputation: 5218Reputation: 5218Reputation: 5218Reputation: 5218Reputation: 5218Reputation: 5218Reputation: 5218
64bit instructions have larger address operands, which will have an impact on the amount of instructions that can be stored in the processors 1st/2nd level cache. Also, more data will need to be transferred to the cpu during instruction fetching, and given that less will fit in the cache there is likely to be a need for more fetches: its kind of a double whammy.

Some early 64bit capable processors likely had caches that were still sized for 32bit operation, reducing the effectiveness of the cache when in 64it mode. I would hope that newer processors will have been given larger caches to better accommodate the larger instructions now that 64bit mode is becoming the norm, but cache size is one of those things that tends to vary from model to model. How much cache is enough, is a harder question to answer though.

Can't say for certain, but if I were to guess, I'd say that this was likely the issue with your older box.
 
Old 08-25-2014, 11:08 AM   #5
enine
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Distribution: Slackʍɐɹǝ
Posts: 1,486

Original Poster
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 283Reputation: 283Reputation: 283
Could be. What I'd like to do with this new box is a quick compare between both. Install 32bit, run benchmark, install 64 bit, run benchmark. My hope is to see which will be better for the new box. I'm not building anything super big and fast http://www.asus.com/Motherboards/AM1MA/ so I'm thinking I could be in that area where the 64bit overhead will cause slowness.
 
Old 08-25-2014, 11:13 AM   #6
hitest
Guru
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Canada
Distribution: Slackware (desktops), Void (thinkpad)
Posts: 7,432

Rep: Reputation: 3848Reputation: 3848Reputation: 3848Reputation: 3848Reputation: 3848Reputation: 3848Reputation: 3848Reputation: 3848Reputation: 3848Reputation: 3848Reputation: 3848
Quote:
Originally Posted by GazL View Post
Can't say for certain, but if I were to guess, I'd say that this was likely the issue with your older box.
Agreed. I'm running 64 bit stable and -current on two older dual core boxes that have 2 GB of RAM. They run XFCE just fine, however, the boxes use more system resources than when I ran 32 bit Slackware.
 
Old 08-25-2014, 11:26 AM   #7
enine
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Distribution: Slackʍɐɹǝ
Posts: 1,486

Original Poster
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 283Reputation: 283Reputation: 283
Thats why I want to give 64 bit another shot. I've been meaning to build a simple pc for the living room so replace the samsung Bluray that has to be rebooted all the time. So I bought a little case and system board and an AMD Athalon 5350 and 4G of ram. Its not high end stuff so I thought that might make a good 64 bit test and compare to 32bit and see if I crossed over to where 64 bit is faster.
 
Old 08-25-2014, 12:28 PM   #8
metaschima
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,982

Rep: Reputation: 492Reputation: 492Reputation: 492Reputation: 492Reputation: 492
I haven't tested any older 64-bit systems, so I don't know if there is a performance increase or decrease. With newer systems 64-bit will have better performance with most programs. For maximum performance you may want to rebuild the kernel for your processor and tweak it a bit.
 
Old 08-25-2014, 12:36 PM   #9
enine
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Distribution: Slackʍɐɹǝ
Posts: 1,486

Original Poster
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 283Reputation: 283Reputation: 283
I tried moving to 64 bit maybe a year ago. What happens is I use old laptops for most of my systems because I have a family of 4 so if I replace one then then it goes down to the kids. One is my server/lab and a lot of newer OS's are coming out 64 bit only. M$ stuff, slowaris, etc. So I needed to have a 64 bit system for my virtual host. My old laptop was a Dell Latitude D620 with 2G RAM and I have been able to run 3-4 virtual guests at one time. I found a latitude D630 which had a 64 bit capable CPU and 2G ram so I installed Slackware 64 on it and virtual box, etc. I couldn't even run one Slackware guest and the system would start paging and slow to an unuseable crawl. Even without trying virtualbox it was still slow. So I reformatted and went back to Slackware 32 bit and can now multitask again.
So it seems that 2G ram was too little since the rest of the hardware is basically the same other than 64 bit capable CPU/non 64bit capable.
So now my server side is working well I'm finally building a media pc client and wondering if I try 64bit with 4G of ram will it start swapping?
 
Old 08-25-2014, 01:05 PM   #10
metaschima
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,982

Rep: Reputation: 492Reputation: 492Reputation: 492Reputation: 492Reputation: 492
RAM use in 64-bit is increased, so you may want to upgrade to 4 GB especially if you run VMs. You may also want to adjust swapiness.
 
Old 08-25-2014, 01:06 PM   #11
enine
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Distribution: Slackʍɐɹǝ
Posts: 1,486

Original Poster
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 283Reputation: 283Reputation: 283
I'm doing 4G on the new box. Then I want to split my LAMP environment off the lab box since I'm now considering it production. The unfortunate side effect of my lab box being a laptop is RAM is overpriced. I have less than $200 in this new mini itx system so if the performance is decent I might just build another. I'll probably buy a drive for it though, looking at 50-60 for a 120G or so SSD. but still $250 for a system.

Last edited by enine; 08-25-2014 at 01:13 PM.
 
Old 08-25-2014, 03:09 PM   #12
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Germany
Distribution: Whatever fits the task best
Posts: 17,148
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4886Reputation: 4886Reputation: 4886Reputation: 4886Reputation: 4886Reputation: 4886Reputation: 4886Reputation: 4886Reputation: 4886Reputation: 4886Reputation: 4886
Recommending a benchmark without having an exact description of your workload would come down to just guessing.
From your description the APU and 4GB of RAM in that system should be able to handle a 64 bit distro quite fine. This is indeed not a high power CPU, it is competing with Intel's Atom CPUs and does so quite well, though it is no competition at all to Intel's i3 or AMD's FX4000 or A4/6/8/10 series. Some benchmarks, all done on Ubuntu 14.04 64 bit here: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...0_ubuntu&num=1

Last edited by TobiSGD; 08-25-2014 at 03:11 PM.
 
Old 08-25-2014, 03:26 PM   #13
a4z
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,727

Rep: Reputation: 742Reputation: 742Reputation: 742Reputation: 742Reputation: 742Reputation: 742Reputation: 742
it is very hard to find a machine that is to weak for Slackware, no mater if 32 or 64 bit
you do not need to waster time with benchmarking performance for a living room pc
check what is better compatible with the software you want to run, that is a better time investion
 
Old 08-25-2014, 03:47 PM   #14
enine
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Distribution: Slackʍɐɹǝ
Posts: 1,486

Original Poster
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 283Reputation: 283Reputation: 283
Well I don't know yet what all it will run. We wasted $500 on a Samsung bluray home theater that had nothing but problems so I spent $40 on an extended warranty when Samsung's warranty was about to expire and spent a couple hours on the phone with the extended warranty company documenting all the problems and they agreed to replace it. Well we got a different model which freezes and locks up so I spent the next year trying to get that replaced and finally gave up. The wife and kids know when the Bluray locks up they just need to reboot it, but the wife tries to keep up on a couple shows on netflix and rebooting and waiting for it to spin up the bluray so you can exit the title menu a couple times per half hour show is getting annoying. It locks up and only power off/on will fix it.

I figured I could throw together a simple PC that would work as well. So its basically going to be AlienBOB's Netflix packages, a web browser and maybe flash for youtube, VLC to play/stream videos and music off our server.

I'm wanting to get a rough idea if 64bit will have the issue I saw before or not so I know weather to install Slackware 64 or 32 and go forward from there.
 
Old 08-26-2014, 08:34 AM   #15
tronayne
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Northeastern Michigan, where Carhartt is a Designer Label
Distribution: Slackware 32- & 64-bit Stable
Posts: 3,541

Rep: Reputation: 1065Reputation: 1065Reputation: 1065Reputation: 1065Reputation: 1065Reputation: 1065Reputation: 1065Reputation: 1065
I have a couple of Dell Dimension 8400's that I use as data base servers. They're both 32-bit with 4G RAM, one runs MariaDB, the other runs PostgreSQL, both are Slackware 14.1 stable, configured identically and are fully patched. They run headless and are administered via SSH (so there's no X running on either one).

I also have two Dell Optiplex 780's. They're 64-bit with 8G RAM, Slackware 64-bit 14.1 stable (fully patched) and are configured identically running Xfce.

I did install Slackware 32-bit 14.1 on one of them and did some comparing between the two (it's not fair to compare the Dimensions against the Optiplexs -- they about 10 years old, fast enough for data base servers but not at all the same thing, kind of like comparing a 2004-era Dodge RAM truck to a 2014 one).

I do a lot of geographic map generation. That means heavy math, lots of calculations, not so much disk I/O. The 32-bit Optiplex did a map of Cold War Europe (from the British Isles to the Urals and from North Africa to the Arctic) with shorelines, rivers, boundaries, country names, populated places (text) and topographic information (colors). The result looks like what you see in an atlas. The 32-bit machine generates all that in about five minutes (takes a lot longer to plot it, though), the 64-bit does it in less than three minutes. The code is identical (compiled on the individual platform), the data are the same and the platforms are the same, the same daemons are running on both.

That "longer plot" is the limits of a printer or plotter, got nothing to do with 32- or 64-bit platforms.

The one difference is the RAM, but the job is compute intensive, not memory intensive (I monitor with GKrellM and don't see a lot of memory use but the cores go like mad). Even though there is 8G available, the 32-bit uses 4G (I didn't have extended memory or whatever that is called enabled). The 64-bt will use whatever it needs but, again, I did not see any ramp-up of memory.

Is that a benchmark? Well, no, not in the traditional sense, probably more anecdotal than anything and I don't think any real lessons can be drawn -- just that 64-bit went speed-fast and 32-bit didn't. For what it's worth.

Both the Optiplx boxes are now 64-bit (it was just an experiment), both haul ass at about the same speed (I can't tell the difference).

My only complaint about 64-bit is that Adobe doesn't provide 64-bit Acrobat (and Acrobat Reader); that's Adobe, got nothing whatsoever to do with Slackware or Linux. Okular works pretty OK but it ain't Adobe Reader and it doesn't do things that Reader does. That isn't much of a complaint and I do get around the shortcomings of Okular with Win7 running in VirtualBox when nothing else will do; Reader is installed in Win7 and works just fine in VirtualBox.

I have zero interest in games or Microsoft anything (Office in particular) so I have no need of Multilib (which is a useful package to all reports but I'm just not interested).

My Dimensions do the job I need them to do: they sit in a closet mumbling to themselves and wake up and go when called upon. My Optiplexes do the jobs I need them to do. The world has gone to 64-bit and it ain't gonna back but there's no reason to throw out a working 32-bit box either. In my experience, 64-bit machines are faster, better, cleanre and I'm going to stick with them.

Hope this helps some.
 
  


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
LXer: This Week: Benchmarking, Benchmarking, & IGDNG LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 08-16-2009 11:50 PM
Benchmarking TL_CLD Slackware 3 10-16-2007 09:42 AM
Video benchmarking in Slackware cwwilson721 Slackware 4 08-25-2006 07:40 PM
Benchmarking DM or WM justanothersteve Linux - Desktop 3 08-08-2006 10:27 AM
Benchmarking goldfish_memory Linux - General 1 11-18-2005 01:45 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:27 AM.

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
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration