2 ms·
It's almost certainly the scheduler, IMO. > On average the Ubuntu 24.10 release was about 14% faster than Microsoft Windows 11 out-of-the-box on this Lunar Lak
by LeifCarrotson 2y ago
It's almost certainly the scheduler, IMO.
> On average the Ubuntu 24.10 release was about 14% faster than Microsoft Windows 11 out-of-the-box on this Lunar Lake powered ASUS Zenbook S 14 laptop.
What else was the "Out-of-the-box" Windows installation trying to do while they were running the benchmark? Sitting here on my Windows 10 installation with nothing but Firefox and Task Manager open, there are dozens of things clamoring for the attention of the scheduler and using CPU:
https://i.imgur.com/NxBOBXm.png https://i.imgur.com/NxBOBXm.png
Yeah, I've installed several of these services on purpose, but I've also uninstalled or inhibited a bunch of things that I didn't need.
- sumtechguy 2y agoWonder if it is putting things onto p-cores more aggressively. Would need to the power graphs at the same time to see that.
- llm_nerd 2y ago>What else was the "Out-of-the-box" Windows installation trying to do while they were running the benchmark? It's trying to maximize the performance to power usage ratio out of the box. The default power profile is very conservative, which on a laptop means better battery life and reduced heat. Given that this comparison didn't do even rudimentary power consumption, heat, or CPU frequency scaling measures, it is overwhelmingly likely as the difference. > there are dozens of things clamoring for the attention of the scheduler and using CPU Linux machines have hundreds of processes too. It simply doesn't matter in 2024. That isn't a factor and isn't relevant, nor is the scheduler to blame. This is a silly misleading benchmark that is de facto clickbait. Pretty surprisedto see it doing well here.
- high_na_euv 2y agoYou have shitton of custom soft there