Jump to content


Arch Linux vs. Slackware vs. Ubuntu vs. Fedora

arch linux slackware ubuntu fedora

  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   abarbarian

abarbarian

    Thread Kahuna

  • Forum MVP
  • 5,396 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 01:35 PM

http://www.phoronix....uxdistros&num=1

Quote

At the request of many Phoronix readers following the release of updated Arch Linux media, here are some new Arch Linux benchmarks. However, this is not just Arch vs. Ubuntu, but rather a larger Linux distribution performance comparison. In this article are benchmark results from Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, CentOS 6.2, Fedora 17, Slackware 14.0 Beta, and Arch Linux.

This shoot out is almost a year old but I thought it would be of interest. I hesitated posting as Arch is not a clear cut winner by any means. Though it does in the main kick Ubuntus butt, well it is more of a playful kick in the pants really. :devil:
Install ARCH
You'll never need to install it again
"I did and I'm really happy"

Posted Image~~~~~~~~~~~~~Posted Image

#2 OFFLINE   V.T. Eric Layton

V.T. Eric Layton

    Nocturnal Slacker

  • Forum Admins
  • 21,257 posts

Posted 23 April 2013 - 04:13 PM

Too techy for me. I got a headache just looking at all those weird acronyms and stats. ;)

#3 OFFLINE   abarbarian

abarbarian

    Thread Kahuna

  • Forum MVP
  • 5,396 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 07:15 AM

I don't bother reading the techy stuff. I just look to see if the appropriate bars on the graphs are longer or shorter than the others :lol:
Install ARCH
You'll never need to install it again
"I did and I'm really happy"

Posted Image~~~~~~~~~~~~~Posted Image

#4 OFFLINE   burninbush

burninbush

    Multithreader

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,278 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 12:58 PM

View Postabarbarian, on 24 April 2013 - 07:15 AM, said:

I don't bother reading the techy stuff. I just look to see if the appropriate bars on the graphs are longer or shorter than the others :lol:


Sad that my favorite Slackware is the slowest of the lot.

Maybe someone here can explain why there should be any differences at all between these distros -- aren't they all pretty much compiled from the same code?

#5 OFFLINE   V.T. Eric Layton

V.T. Eric Layton

    Nocturnal Slacker

  • Forum Admins
  • 21,257 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 02:30 PM

It's difficult to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges in that test unless they use the exact same hardware and software (other than the operating systems) to test. That didn't seem to be the case with that test. In some instances, they were using different graphics hardware and different windows managers. Of course, you'll see performance differences.

Slackware doesn't need to be "fast". That ol' tortoise did OK after all, didn't he. ;)

https://en.wikipedia...se_and_the_Hare

#6 OFFLINE   securitybreach

securitybreach

    CLI Phreak

  • Forum Admins
  • 23,172 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 02:57 PM

View PostV.T. Eric Layton, on 24 April 2013 - 02:30 PM, said:

It's difficult to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges in that test unless they use the exact same hardware and software (other than the operating systems) to test. That didn't seem to be the case with that test. In some instances, they were using different graphics hardware and different windows managers. Of course, you'll see performance differences.


Great point!! I am surprised they did not test them with the same specs and setup. Otherwise, the whole review is meaningless.
Posted ImagePosted Image Posted Image
CNI Radio/G+ Profile/Configs/PGP Key/comhack π

"Do you begin to see, then, what kind of world we are creating? It is the exact opposite of the stupid hedonistic Utopias that the old reformers imagined. A world of fear and treachery and torment, a world of trampling and being trampled upon, a world which will grow not less but more merciless as it refines itself. Progress in our world will be progress toward more pain." -George Orwell, 1984

#7 OFFLINE   abarbarian

abarbarian

    Thread Kahuna

  • Forum MVP
  • 5,396 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 07:17 PM

View PostV.T. Eric Layton, on 24 April 2013 - 02:30 PM, said:

It's difficult to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges in that test unless they use the exact same hardware and software (other than the operating systems) to test. That didn't seem to be the case with that test. In some instances, they were using different graphics hardware and different windows managers. Of course, you'll see performance differences.

Slackware doesn't need to be "fast". That ol' tortoise did OK after all, didn't he. ;)

https://en.wikipedia...se_and_the_Hare


Quote

These five popular Linux distributions were benchmarked from an Intel Core i7 3960X "Sandy Bridge Extreme Edition" system with 8GB of RAM, a 64GB OCZ SSD, and Radeon HD 4650 graphics card. Arch, Slackware, Fedora, CentOS, and Ubuntu were all benchmarked in their stock/default configuration as much as possible. Obviously with Arch Linux being a rolling-release it is much harder to do, but these are just results to largely appease the Phoronix readers requesting such a comparison.
Same graphics and cpu and memory,seems to be a difference in memory usage though. I think they used the default WM for the os. It was more of a real world test than a scientific one as it seems to me.
I recon benchmarking can be quite fun and it does help when it comes to folk making large changes to the software we all use. :shifty:
Install ARCH
You'll never need to install it again
"I did and I'm really happy"

Posted Image~~~~~~~~~~~~~Posted Image

#8 OFFLINE   V.T. Eric Layton

V.T. Eric Layton

    Nocturnal Slacker

  • Forum Admins
  • 21,257 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 07:55 PM

They use Xfce for Slackware, but KDE is actually Slackware's default DE/WM, as least since I've been using it... Slackware 9. They're also using different versions of X and Radeon drivers, but that's probably because they're using the stock stuff from the generic install of each OS.

Phoronix is usually a stickler for accuracy on these type tests, so I'm pretty sure there isn't anything fishy about this one. They tried to get the very different distributions pretty close before comparing them with their benchmark tests.

What's it all mean? Nothing, really. I'm aware of the performance qualities of each of these distributions. I'm not going to dump Slackware for Fedora, though. If I were going to dump Slackware for any of those distros, it would be CentOS, actually. :yes:





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: arch, linux, slackware, ubuntu, fedora

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users