4 ms·

? What I see when I look at that benchmark is a comparison between linux running in a VM, via WSL and natively. AKA, VMs are slower than bare metal. News at 10

? What I see when I look at that benchmark is a comparison between linux running in a VM, via WSL and natively. AKA, VMs are slower than bare metal. News at 10. Sure there are things windows tends to be slower at, but similarly there are things linux tends to be slower at. For general desktop usage I think you will find two things, windows does quite well, and desktop level virtualization tends to be slower than server virtualization because most desktop users will be using a virtio/emulation IO access method vs servers which tend to be punching PCIe adapters into the VMs. Either way, the overhead of additional translation layers and VM exits for various things is always going to be worse than just running on bare metal. Wether that works out to barely noticeable for compute heavy benchmarks that are TLB friendly, 2x for small packet edge case IO's, or somewhere in between is completely application dependent.

sams99 8y ago
WSL is not technically a VM... The news is not the it is slower, it is how much slower it is. I found the number surprising given the prevailing wisdom out there was ... sure its slower, about 5-10% slower. The other news is that mac is slower and it does not do any virtualising.
- AstralStorm 8y ago
  WSL is quite slow indeed, compared even to a low performance VM like Virtualbox w/ a bit of hardware help. Much less to something like KVM with paravirtualization drivers, or even Hyper-V likewise.
mappu 8y ago
> VMs are slower than bare metal. News at 10. The other interesting part of the benchmark is the i7-8559U (Coffee Lake, 4C8T, 2.7GHz) macOS vs i7-8750H (Coffee Lake, 6C12T, 2.2GHz) Ubuntu, on a single-threaded benchmark ("We are going to adopt parallel testing for our dev environments this year"). MacOS took 1.6x as long as Ubuntu, despite a 1.2x GHz advantage, for an overall 1.9x slowdown core-per-core on the same microarchitecture. Would you like 2x performance? Just replace macOS with Ubuntu. "There is no other operating system out there that competes against us at this time" - Greg Kroah-Hartman, 2018
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

sams99 8y ago

WSL is not technically a VM... The news is not the it is slower, it is how much slower it is. I found the number surprising given the prevailing wisdom out there was ... sure its slower, about 5-10% slower. The other news is that mac is slower and it does not do any virtualising.

AstralStorm 8y ago
WSL is quite slow indeed, compared even to a low performance VM like Virtualbox w/ a bit of hardware help. Much less to something like KVM with paravirtualization drivers, or even Hyper-V likewise.

mappu 8y ago

> VMs are slower than bare metal. News at 10. The other interesting part of the benchmark is the i7-8559U (Coffee Lake, 4C8T, 2.7GHz) macOS vs i7-8750H (Coffee Lake, 6C12T, 2.2GHz) Ubuntu, on a single-threaded benchmark ("We are going to adopt parallel testing for our dev environments this year"). MacOS took 1.6x as long as Ubuntu, despite a 1.2x GHz advantage, for an overall 1.9x slowdown core-per-core on the same microarchitecture. Would you like 2x performance? Just replace macOS with Ubuntu. "There is no other operating system out there that competes against us at this time" - Greg Kroah-Hartman, 2018

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]