30 ms·
Windows 11 Pro: about 11% slower than Linux on Intel Core i9 11900K
- DeathArrow 5y agoI bet it's also 20% slower than Windows 10.
- trasz 5y agoOne of the problems with Phoronix benchmarks is that they don’t even try to build software properly, making sure it’s not using suboptimal flags and doesn’t artificially prefer one particular environment. One needs to take those results with a grain of salt.
- ziml77 5y agoI don't see any mention of Virtualization Based Security. Is that enabled for these tests? Because that makes a large difference in performance. With it disabled, 11 shouldn't run much different from 10.
- andybak 5y agoThat was the first thing I wanted to check. It seems the author isn't aware of the existing fuss surrounding this: https://hothardware.com/news/vbs-kills-win11-gaming-perf https://hothardware.com/news/vbs-kills-win11-gaming-perf
- tut-urut-utut 5y agoOnly 11% slower is quite an achievement for Windows. I expected much slower. Good job for Microsoft. No, this is not sarcastic.
- revolvingocelot 5y agoI unironically agree. For those that don't, have you never put slackware on an ancient laptop and marvelled at the functional computer you've effortlessly created?
- elzbardico 5y agoGiven that most software on this benchmark are basically open source linux citizens, I would say windows 11, which is basically way more functional and has way more features than linux did pretty well, given that we can expect that most of those software packages have probably more optimization work for linux than for windows. Not bad at all.
- Aardwolf 5y agoNot sure which features you mean, but Linux seems to have more of the features that I need myself, like having the ability to choose in what way taskbar buttons are grouped, or the ability to not get regular "system notifications" that are not related to something I'm doing or interested in, and the ability to choose when you update it
- 0134340 5y agoOn Linux, I can even move my taskbar to the top of the screen or to the side and drag & drop things to the taskbar. So now I can't have my normal screen brightness shortcut on my taskbar nor is there a way I know of to use hotkeys to launch it via command other than 3rd party like Autohotkey. I tried Windows 11 and I can't forgive MS for taking away these simple and essential features.
- Aardwolf 5y agoDepends on what desktop you install I guess. There are some that have taskbar at top of screen by default, like Gnome afaik. I'm more of a taskbar at the bottom person myself and use cinnamon.
- fwsgonzo 5y agoI have to say that I agree with this. The primary purpose of an operating system now that I passed my *rties is to get out of the way. And Linux does that really well, while Windows is doing it less and less. I'm happy that we have at least 3-4 popular operating systems still, and that this should help drive innovation. But at the same time, I feel like Linux gets all the free innovation because of its openness. And if you add all the benefits of Linux being very user-friendly (as in not spamming me with ads), then it's just going to be a better choice.
- aungkokomm 5y agoMight be disturbing, but comparing those two OSs is a stupid thing at the first place because these 2 OSS have vast difference in background and functionalities.
- afrcnc 5y ago
- edhelas 5y agoThat's just your opinion :)
- Mikeb85 5y agoIt's really not. It just has some proprietary software that's not available on Linux.
- 13of40 5y agoI've tried to love Linux since the early 90s, but things like... https://youtu.be/daadsaHhXB8 https://youtu.be/daadsaHhXB8 ...the ten step process to simply add an icon to the Ubuntu desktop to run a shell script are a bit of a buzz kill. Maybe it's better now, but in Windows it's been a drag and drop or a right-click since 1995.
- StillBored 5y agoThis has been a lot better with KDE for a while. I don't really understand all the love for the javascript laden, touch UI oriented gnome vs plasma. I suspect though the lack of attention though is partially why KDE has remained fairly stable. People working on it are focusing on fixing things rather than rewriting it.
- simion314 5y ago>I don't really understand all the love for the javascript laden, touch UI oriented gnome GNOME and Apple is form over function design.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- 5y ago
- endisneigh 5y agoStrange that windows 10 isn’t in the charts
- Lendal 5y agoIn other news: Hammer cuts wood 23% slower than saw.
- brewdad 5y ago* Mjöllnir has entered the chat
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- wing-_-nuts 5y agoThe last windows 10 vs linux benchmark that I saw had linux anywhere from 15 to 22% faster than windows 10, so if anything, this could be considered an improvement. https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=windows-may2020-linux&num=9 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=windows-... >If taking the geometric mean of all 114 benchmark results, Windows 10 May 2020 on the Threadripper 3970X was running at 78% the speed of the fastest Linux distribution (Clear Linux) or 86% the speed of the slowest Linux distribution benchmarked (openSUSE Tumbleweed). vs the most recent test... >The geometric mean for all 44 tests showed Linux clearly in front of Windows 11 for this current-generation Intel platform. Ubuntu / Arch / Fedora were about 11% faster overall than Windows 11 Pro on this system. Meanwhile, Clear Linux was about 18% faster than Windows 11 and enjoyed about 5% better performance overall than the other Linux distributions.
- wodenokoto 5y agoJust for the record, 100 is more than a 22% percent increase from 78. If windows is 78% of Linux speed, then Linux is 28% faster than windows.
- Dudeman112 5y agoSlightly off topic, but it seems like this has been pointed out my whole life and people in general still muddle this up. Is there ever gonna be a day when that doesn't happen? People should seriously stop sleeping during those mathematics classes
- AnotherGoodName 5y agoBlame the % symbol that hides the '/100' fraction. If anyone was asked the inverse of 78/100 they'd correctly say 100/78 everytime.
- floatingatoll 5y agohttps://xkcd.com/2501/ https://xkcd.com/2501/ Fractions are badly understood by quite a lot of people [1], even for an operation as simple as "inverse", and especially if they had to learn one time that x^-1 = 1/x to pass a quiz. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28935891 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28935891
- supernovae 5y agoIf workloads are optimized for linux, run them in linux. None of these benchmarks are really user experiences anyway and the differences are so low it doesn't matter. Dumb title.
- marcodiego 5y agoTLDR: Benchmarks used: - ParaView - DaCapo Benchmark - Renaissance - TSCP - LuxCoreRender - dav1d - SVT-AV1 - Stockfish - libavif avifenc - FLAC audio encoding - IndigoBench - Blender - Appleseed - WavPack Audio Encoding - Git - Chaos Group V-RAY Clear linux is about 18% faster, other distros (Arch, Ubuntu 20.04, 20.10, Fedora Workstation 35) are 11% faster.
- theknocker 5y agoWe're even timetraveling back to the era where Microsoft employees come try to persuade us that their company's software isn't obviously garbage, like a brainwashed cult.
- acd 5y agoLinux with the Windows emulation layer Drawbridge Library OS from the Linux port of Microsoft SQL server may possibly run Windows faster than native Windows. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/asplos2011-drawbridge.pdf https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/...
- smoldesu 5y agoNot quite the same thing, but the performance hit when running Windows software in Wine is frighteningly low. Even harder to run games like Overwatch[0] still stand toe-to-toe with their Windows counterparts, which is really surprising considering how many people tried (and failed) to run it at a playable framerate in a VM. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voXc1nCD4IA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voXc1nCD4IA
- ActorNightly 5y agoIm super confused how they benchmarked that. How do you play the same game across two different OS?
- smoldesu 5y agoOverwatch lets you save recordings of gameplay a-la Quake 2, and then you can re-play the match at will, even on different systems so long as they're compatible. Looks like they played a match, saved the results and recorded the playback on both systems. It's not exactly the same as playing online (for example, your CPU isn't negotiating networking bandwidth all the time), but it's definitely a level playing field for measuring graphics performance.
- marcodiego 5y agoGames are usually CPU-bound. When the graphics additional layers are thin, and DXVK is indeed very thin, there's no reason it will take a huge performance hit.
- metalliqaz 5y ago
- lostmsu 5y ago> Clear Linux performs well due to agressive compiler flags Did they compare software built with different flags for different platforms?
- ThaJay 5y agoWindows 10 was supposed to be the last Windows and I'm sticking with it forever.
- martini333 5y agolol
- dymk 5y agoI said that about XP, and then 7…
- cjsawyer 5y agoThis is about how Microsoft marketed it.
- jaywalk 5y agoOne developer said it in an interview, and Microsoft never issued a correction. Microsoft never actually marketed it that way, and honestly I'm not sure why anyone even believed that developer at the time. That being said, Windows 11 is a free upgrade. So aside from just not liking the changes (I personally like most of them) there's not much room to complain about Windows 10 not actually being the last version of Windows.
- dehrmann 5y ago> Windows 11 is a free upgrade. If your computer is new-ish.
- jaywalk 5y agoWell, yeah. And I think that's ultimately why they bumped it up to 11, because they wanted to drop support for older hardware. Even if Windows 10 was going to be the "last version" of Windows, it would be insane to believe that it would continue to support all hardware forever. That being said, the cutoff line for Windows 11 CPU support does seem to be a bit higher than necessary. But I don't know all of the reasoning behind why they chose the point that they did.
- havkd 5y agoWindows 11 contains ∞% more Win32 and directx on the other hand. What do I care if another OS is faster if it can’t do what I want? Surely DOS on modern hardware is Lightning fast.
- krylon 5y agoOh, indeed. I had the pleasure of installing MS DOS 6.22 on two machines a couple of years ago. Booting, after the BIOS had done its thing, was nearly instantaneous. The installation procedure itself was also very fast (no surprise there), it took maybe five to ten minutes per machine, and I suspect it could have been faster if reading from floppy disks wasn't the bottle neck.
- megous 5y agoLinux has win32/directx API via wine project.
- Shadonototra 5y agowhy would you need Win32 or DX? IO? Networking? Win32 APIs are bad and slower I'm pretty sure majority of people don't care about DX 12, as vulkan seems to get the lead, even on windows (DX 11 still probably is more popular, but also older)
- smoldesu 5y agoNot to mention, sometimes you even see a performance increase when running DX code through Vulkan translation (DXVK).
- martini333 5y agoWhat an useless comparison...
- kasabali 5y agoThat's Phoronix benchmarks in a nutshell.
- jayd16 5y agoKind of irrelevant if you need to run Photoshop, for example. Would be interesting some Unity Editor benchmarks as well.
- trevorishere 5y agoSoon... https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/photoshop-web-faq.html https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/photoshop-web-faq.ht...
- haunter 5y ago>Windows 11 Pro: about 11% slower than Linux on Intel Core i9 11900K I play a lot of games (Windows 10) and haven't found any that runs noticeably better under "Linux" (I usually tried Ubuntu and Manjaro). Best it's on par but sometimes even worse. And the old article with Windows 10 was actually even worse for Windows (15-20%) slower [1]. So this a good article, Windows is improving (or "Linux" getting worse) https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=windows-may2020-linux&num=9 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=windows-...
- Retr0spectrum 5y agoGaming performance usually comes down to graphics drivers.
- marcodiego 5y agoAlso, some games are not native. The few which are, were ported with no care to make good use of the better linux features or syscalls. They were not optimized and it is a great feat of the kernel to still run them at good performance.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y agoWhat about this though?: 'Windows 11 WSL2 Performance Is Quite Competitive Against Ubuntu 20.04 LTS / Ubuntu 21.10' https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=windows11-wsl2-good&num=1 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=windows1...
- marcodiego 5y agoIt means: linux is fast even with windows disturbing it.
- powersnail 5y agoAt some point in the future, we'll see a blog post: "Run Your Windows Programs through WINE on WSL for Better Performance!"
- BuckRogers 5y agoThis is why you always have to benchmark YOUR software, your usecase. If Linux works better for your use of "dav1d" or whatever else is on this list, then it may be what you should be using. I use nothing on this list of benchmarks other than git, and I think I'm good on the trade offs here to move to desktop Linux. I personally love Windows 11 and typing this on it, with my 11900K. I won't be switching.
- Sesse__ 5y agoNot defending Phoronix' benchmarks, but do you ever play YouTube videos? If so, you're most likely using dav1d.
- marcodiego 5y agoThese benchmarks are quite general and good measurement of how high performant apps behave when running on different kernels. This advantage probably translates to other workloads as well. At the least, these results show that software vendors could improve the performance of their applications by porting to linux.
- BuckRogers 5y agoYou need to actually prove that for each piece of software being ported, otherwise it's an assumption for potentially a million dollar investment for what would be a very poor business decision. It always depends on who is paying, you? If it were an outright win, we'd all be on desktop Linux ages ago. It's a trade off, and you lose a lot. Including customers, by wasting money on a desktop Linux port when you can deliver value where 95% of your customers are. The other 5% is macOS. Your competition is most likely focused on Windows. Other than server usage that is, Linux is a fine server. For my money, if I did find a performance loss on Windows, I'd start by working on either improving my implementation, or if it is a kernel issue to collaborate with Microsoft to equalize that. Rather than kick off years of support, and potentially millions of dollars on what is comparatively a barren wasteland.
- haolez 5y agoWindows has the tracking and telemetry requirement that Linux doesn't have to deal with. It must be tough spying on everything that the user does and keep the interface responsive enough :)
- Shadonototra 5y agothe only benchmark is care about is: how fast my project will compile from my experience, linux compiles my code about 5-10x faster than on windows
- neogodless 5y agoThat's incredible! Can you give us some more details outlining how you made the comparison, including what hardware, and what kind of code you were compiling?
- vadfa 5y agoIt's not incredible. Many operations such as creating a new process and accessing a file, which are done thousands or millions of times when you compile an application, are much, much slower on Windows than on Linux. That time adds up.
- marcodiego 5y ago> That's incredible! That is not incredible. I've seen windows machines take minutes to compile project from arduino-ide that compiled in a few seconds on same class machines on linux with a few students. I think it has to do with windows defender. It probably has to check binaries which are created or executed. I saw a student got a good improvement in compile times after disabling it. I didn't measure it, but I can say it was significant.
- ho_schi 5y agoLinux is a pleasure to use with the terminal and your favorite UI. GCC, Neovim or whatever you use are easily usable. And yes - it is always compiling faster. But I would say, honestly twice as fast ;) In real world scenarios Windows will be probably even slower, to to installed secondary and tertiary Antivirus and bloatware on top and unmaintained drivers. While on Linux you better choose your hardware wisely before buying, than it will run smooth. Intel and AMD are always fine.
- FrrFrr 5y agoYeah this lines up. Anything storage related on Windows is an order of magnitude slower. The way Linux has architected NVMe storage IO path vs Windows makes a huge difference. Just too many layers of abstraction for the storage stack on Windows. It worked great when we had spinning HDDs and IO was much much slower than memory. Now with super fast IO all those layers are creating bottlenecks. You’ll get faster speeds on Windows with WSL + ext3/4 than native Win + NTFS.
- londons_explore 5y agoWhat does Clear Linux do differently? Different config of frequencies or thermal throttling or something?
- hu3 5y agoI remember when Debian + Wine used to run Warcraft 3 faster and smoother than Windows. Might still be the case. Once at a LAN party, every Windows machine had their Warcraft 3 playing on the same match crash simultaneously, but mine under Wine didn't. I had a good laugh.
- backoncemore 5y agoNot surprising. I haven't used Windows 11 but both MacOS and Windows 10 feel more sluggish to me than Ubuntu.
- Kenji 5y agoYes, and Ubuntu is one of the most bloated Linuxes. Windows especially fucked up in the file system department. NTFS is easily 100x slower than ext4 when you access a lot of small files.
- phendrenad2 5y agoThis feels like damning Linux with faint praise. You mean everyone who told me "Windows is way slower than Linux" were way off-base, and the reality is only 11%? It's almost an argument for switching to Linux not being worth not only configuration hassles, but not even the time investment to initially switch.
- b0tzzzzzzman 5y agoBut how much faster is Windows 11 than Windows XP?
- sedatk 5y agoI wonder how much of these results were actually due to compiler/benchmark implementation rather than operating system mechanisms. I expect file system related (not I/O) benchmarks would differ significantly in Linux' favor as we'd observed with WSL1 vs WSL2; but the rest? Are we to believe that DirectX 12, the API that’s supported by hardware vendors themselves, optimized to no end for first-class gaming, is actually slower than whatever's on Linux? (Not downplaying the significant achievements of Linux in graphics, but meagerly pointing out the fact that Windows is way ahead in graphics performance because of politics) For example, Windows 11 loses in all Java benchmarks. Coincidentally, Oracle has great investment in Linux as a platform. Is this really a fair operating system comparison? Similarly, GCC is optimized primarily for Linux. Windows is a second-class citizen there. It could be the same case with clang as well, I don't know. How are we supposed to be sure that compilers treat two OS's the same? Do benchmark apps get compiled with MSVC on Windows? I think OS performance can only be compared fairly with benchmarks specifically designed to measure OS performance, not performance of a specific application per se, simply because the developers have varying priorities for optimizing their apps for a platform. An OS benchmark could measure context switch latency, I/O latency, raw I/O throughput, certain responsiveness metrics etc, compiled with the preferred compiler of the platform.
- Too 5y agoWhat exactly is “OS performance”, if not running applications? Micro benchmarks can be compared to premature optimization. Which we all know is the root of all evil. There are lots of realistic workloads where some benchmark gives completely opposite and counter intuitive results, often due to caching and scheduling tricks.
- sedatk 5y agoI thought I already explained this. OS isn't the sole, maybe not even the main arbiter of performance when compiler and developer biases can cause a greater difference. I already explained that some scenarios (like FS) would have significant variance due to the differences in design philosophies. That doesn't have to mean that one OS is objectively worse than the other, but it could mean that they prioritize different scenarios. I don't think we have any way to tell if an OS is objectively "faster" without resorting to micro benchmarks which you're right about them not being so meaningful.