Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX

Repost "Question"

(1/4) > >>

Centurian:
Hey all,

This is a repost since the original was deleted during the server upgrade.

BTW this isn't a which is better post. I am seriously asking why it is this way.

I keep seeing people say how slow windows is compared to linux. So I decided to make some tests myself.

Computer
Celeron 600
Socket 370 M754LMR Motherboard
128 meg of ram
nVidia video card
C-media sound card
Mandrake 8.1
Windows 98 SE

Startup from Lilo Boot Manager
Linux Time = "1 minute 51 seconds" with user auto-login active booting to KDE.
Windows 98 Time = "13 seconds"

Starting Mozilla
Linux First time used since boot = "48 seconds"
Restarts = "27 seconds"
Can't find a "Quick Launch option under Linux"
Windows First time used since boot Not using "Quick Launch" = "11 seconds"
Restarts = "3 seconds"
Windows First time used since boot Using "Quick Launch" = "5 seconds"
Restarts = "1 second"

So am I doing something severly wrong in Linux or absolutely right in Windows or are these expected results?

Any clue?
BTW, I was also wondering why everytime I go out drinking with my friends, I come home, and my ass is sore?

Later
Centurian

saquarrier:
commenting out some options in your boot scripts /etc/rc.d/ might help you boot faster and use less ram while your running.  Most people don't need apache running on their desktop for instance.

badkarma:
http://www.acl.lanl.gov/linuxbios/

but I think the 3 seconds on the front page is referring to a linux system without XFree86 running.

plus the list of supported mainboards is rather short (and no ASUS7M266 support damnit  :(  )

getting a lot of RAM helps a lot too with general linux use because the kernel tries to load as much as it can into memory, usually when I'm compiling something I have 0 HDD activity because all the files just get loaded into memory (and seeing I have 1Gb DDR RAM the kernel can do a lot of caching, and does too, it's not unusual for me to have the whole 1Gb in use (with about 10-20% user data and the rest cache))

[ January 22, 2002: Message edited by: BadKarma ]

greydys_will:

quote:Originally posted by Centurian:
Hey all,

This is a repost since the original was deleted during the server upgrade.

BTW this isn't a which is better post. I am seriously asking why it is this way.

I keep seeing people say how slow windows is compared to linux. So I decided to make some tests myself.

Computer
Celeron 600
Socket 370 M754LMR Motherboard
128 meg of ram
nVidia video card
C-media sound card
Mandrake 8.1
Windows 98 SE

Startup from Lilo Boot Manager
Linux Time = "1 minute 51 seconds" with user auto-login active booting to KDE.
Windows 98 Time = "13 seconds"

Starting Mozilla
Linux First time used since boot = "48 seconds"
Restarts = "27 seconds"
Can't find a "Quick Launch option under Linux"
Windows First time used since boot Not using "Quick Launch" = "11 seconds"
Restarts = "3 seconds"
Windows First time used since boot Using "Quick Launch" = "5 seconds"
Restarts = "1 second"

So am I doing something severly wrong in Linux or absolutely right in Windows or are these expected results?

Any clue?

Later
Centurian
--- End quote ---



Well try doing this on your Windows box:

Attempt to burn a cd.
Play mp3's on winamp.
Compile an application using one of the dreaded Windows compilers.
Surf the net.

After the Windows box locks up and requires you to force a reboot by pushing the reset button, try the same thing on a Linux box.  You will soon be convinced about why do people rave about Linux's performance superiority over Microsoft products.

Centurian:
Hey saquarrier,

I had only necessary items in the boot scripts. And no I definitely was not running Apache.  

Hey BadKarma,

Thanks much for the link and the tip on ram.

Hey Will,

I did not say Linux was unstable (like windows is) I said it was slow on that computer.  

Thanks to everyone who has posted. I have done quite a bit of research on it since I posted this and have come to the following conclusions.

1. The motherboard is only partially compatible with Linux.
2. The sound card is barely compatible at all (anything more than a beep would not work).
3. The video card nVidia Aladdin TNT2 is not directly compatible have to use a generic driver for it to work.  
4. That machine is a built for Windows 98 computer and it runs very slowly (although quite stable) under Linux.
5. I really don't like Intel processors. Have always used AMD up until the 600.

After learning the above it showed me how powerful Linux really is. If it can run stable (even if it is slow) with the above marks against it then it is a very solid OS.

Solution : I bought a new computer one that is 100% compatible with Linux quaranteed. Got it at www.linuxcomputersystems.com

When it arrives hopefully the middle of next week I will have a decent computer again.

Athlon 1600
256M DDR
Asus Geforce MX200 32M

If that isn't enough I will just add some more ram.  

Later
Centurian

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page