Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Benchmarked: Ubuntu vs Vista vs Win7

(1/4) > >>

zridling:
From TuxRadar.com:
A lot of people have been chattering about the improvements Windows 7 brings for Windows users, but how does it compare to Ubuntu in real-world tests? We put Ubuntu 8.10, Windows Vista and Windows 7 through their paces in both 32-bit and 64-bit tests to see just how well Ubuntu faces the new contender. And, just for luck, we threw in a few tests using Jaunty Jackalope with ext4.

When Windows users say that Windows 7 is easier to install than ever, what do they really mean? When they say it's faster, is it just in their heads, or is Microsoft really making big strides forward? And, perhaps most importantly, when Linux benchmarkers show us how screamingly fast ext4 is compared to ext3, how well do those figures actually transfer to end users?

These are the questions we wanted to answer, so we asked Dell to provide us with a high-spec machine to give all the operating systems room to perform to their max. Our test machine packed an Intel Core i7 920, which in layman's terms has four cores running at 2.67GHz with hyperthreading and 8MB of L3 cache. It also had 6GB of RAM, plus two 500GB of hard drives with 16MB of cache.


________________________________________________
Interesting comparisons. BIG caveat? Don't forget that Win7 is still beta.

Eóin:
For the most part it's the final test which interests me most and Windows wins out there. And honestly, who gets a quad core, 6gb machine and only runs a bunch of file copying tests, pathetic I got to say.

mouser:
Every benchmark ever created is attacked for being "not representative", so i don't think its fair to knock such things -- the site presented a mostly interesting set of comparisons.

The only benchmark i honestly view as absolutely irrelevant is installation time.. Unless you plan on reinstalling your OS once a week, i don't see why it really matters how long it takes you to install the OS.

Eóin:
True it's easy to attack benchmarks, but these seem like a particularly eclectic set of choices to me.

There are a tonne of cross platform apps out there that they could have run. Sure then people would go and poke holes in those particular setups but it would still be a huge leap closer to "real-world tests".

mouser:
There are a tonne of cross platform apps out there that they could have run. Sure then people would go and poke holes in those particular setups but it would still be a huge leap closer to "real-world tests".
--- End quote ---

fair enough -- they could have tested real work applications, that would be helpful.  that's not really a knock on the benchmarks they ran, but rather a need for additional benchmarks.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page