Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 6th Nov 2008 11:29 UTC
Benchmarks Phoronix compared the performance figures of Mac OS X 10.5.5 with those of Ubuntu 8.10. They conclude: "Apple's Mac OS X 10.5.5 Leopard had strong performance leads over Canonical's Ubuntu 8.10 Intrepid Ibex in the OpenGL performance with the integrated Intel graphics, disk benchmarking, and SQLite database in particular. Ubuntu on the other hand was leading in the compilation and BYTE Unix Benchmark. In the audio/video encoding and PHP XML tests the margins were smaller and no definitive leader had emerged. With the Java environment, Sunflow and Bork were faster in Mac OS X, but the Intrepid Ibex in SciMark 2 attacked the Leopard. These results though were all from an Apple Mac Mini."
Thread beginning with comment 336486
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Mac Mini?
by Hakime on Thu 6th Nov 2008 13:28 UTC in reply to "Mac Mini?"
Hakime
Member since:
2005-11-16

"I know from my experience that 3d OpenGL apps in Linux easily outperform their OSX counterparts. Talking about real world results..."

Strange, I've never seen any 3D app running on Mac OS X outperforming OS X, i am sorry but OS X has a much better Open GL implementation than Linux, pure and simple.

Also as a side remark, with the last Xcode development environment version (3.1), Gcc 4.2 is provided among Gcc 4.0 and from what i saw using it, it is significantly faster than Gcc 4.0 for compilation.

And i wonder if the small differences between Mac OS X and Ubuntu x86_64 in the encoding benchmarks are not simply due to the fact that Lame, Ogg encodind and FFmpeg are not compiled in 64 modes on Mac OS X. On Ubuntu x86_64, they take advantage of the additional registers in 64 mode particularly beneficial for this sort of benchmarks.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 5

RE[2]: Mac Mini?
by apoclypse on Thu 6th Nov 2008 13:50 in reply to "RE: Mac Mini?"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

That may be true in certain cases but I have yet to see anything really push opengl on a Mac. Even then if you were say do this benchmark comparison on a Mac Book Pro SR or later, Linux would win hands down because while the Nvidia drivers on Linux aren't perfect they are a hell of a lot better than the sluggish, buggy drivers included in OSX. If they use ATI hardware that's a totally different story because ATI's hardware has better drivers under OSX. Intel hardware just all around sucks. I do agree with you that the opengl stack in OSX is better than Linux, but a lot of that has to do with the way X's architectureand how it relates to the hardware, this is being worked on at the moment.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 4

RE[2]: Mac Mini?
by thomas mahler on Thu 6th Nov 2008 18:16 in reply to "RE: Mac Mini?"
thomas mahler Member since:
2007-07-03

Try Maya, to give you one example. The Linux version will give you a much higher framerate than the Mac version. OpenGL in OSX on Nvidia cards is sluggish and slow, IMO.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 3

RE[2]: Mac Mini?
by rockwell on Thu 6th Nov 2008 22:57 in reply to "RE: Mac Mini?"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

//Strange, I've never seen any 3D app running on Mac OS X outperforming OS X,//

What?

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2

RE[3]: Mac Mini?
by Darkelve on Fri 7th Nov 2008 07:31 in reply to "RE[2]: Mac Mini?"
Darkelve Member since:
2006-02-06

Well, his statement is factually correct... even though it does not make much sense ;)

He probably meant to say 'Linux' instead of 'OS X' (at the end of the sentence)

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2