

Five Years Of Linux Kernel Benchmarks: 2.6.12 Through 2.6.37 - logicalstack
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_2612_2637

======
kevinelliott
It's actually quite disappointing to see that the Linux kernel performance
essentially never increased over 5 years. A lot of nice functionality was
added, so at least the lack of a net loss is quite fantastic.

I wonder if this report might give the kernel folks the boost they need to be
truly innovative moving forward.

------
dododo
the choice of some of these benchmarks is weird. they have a bunch of cpu-
bound benchmarks. why exactly would you expect these to change as the kernel
changed? (i would expect changing compiler to have a bigger influence.)

the ones that do change (and improve mostly) are ones where the kernel
actually plays a role--file system, network, etc.

the iozone benchmark is a bit surprising, it shows no improvement. but they
are hitting 200MB/s, so i wonder if this is simply because linux is hitting
the max speed of the disk.

all in all, not very useful.

~~~
wmf
In general Moronix doesn't know what they're doing, but such benchmarks can be
useful as regression tests; if the kernel _isn't_ giving you full hardware
performance then you have a problem.

------
roadnottaken
Simple way to get me to NOT read your article: give it a flash-based popup-ad
and split the article into 8 separate pages. I just want to see the data.
Fail.

~~~
rw-
phoronix.com sucks anyway :)

------
tlb
Please standardize on either lower=better or higher=better. The graphs switch
conventions frequently making it hard to interpret at a glance.

------
shawndumas
I wonder how OSX's and WinNT's would look?

