2
hardfault
301d

Ubuntu 🤬

only releasing amd64 image !! , supporting an instruction set architecture does not mean code is optimised for other microarchitecture
i thought linux distributions are do less and do way better than others, so why so much bloatware!!!.

ideally best way is to compile your own kernel and add minimal gui support as required, too much work !!!

also just a heads-up if you are using Catalina use virtual-box 6.0.22
also vivado 2019.2 is suable with ubuntu 18.04 + lightdm , remove that gnome shit

Comments
  • 1
    @FrodoSwaggins I don’t have any measurable practical stats to make an argument against your comments yet, but uarch is important, ISA doesn’t tell how much clock cycle an instruction will take, also the instruction pipeline and out of oder execution technique are different for diff uarch , sometimes it helps to compile for particular uarch even for small programs, specially demons or anything that run in background.
    Also the on chip GPU will be will be completely different
    I don’t think it’s a small price because it adds up for multiple things and produces a laggy unoptimized experience
  • 0
    @FrodoSwaggins i will try with linux distro that has i64 build , and let you know the performance
  • 1
    Expecting a generic output of distros from Linux is about is like saying "I thought computers were fast but this pentium 4 is so slow".

    There are many flavours of Linux with different foci, lumping them all together doesn't make sense.
  • 1
    @hardfault If the experience is laggy, it's not the compilation options, but superfluous services and shitty SW architecture. Recompiling wouldn't help anyway because you wouldn't even notice some 10% speed.

    E.g. Windows has dynamic thread prios with a momentary prio boost when a thread gets woken up. That's because it's designed as desktop OS for better GUI snappiness.
  • 1
    @FrodoSwaggins agree, but what about on chip peripherals and different ISA extensions.

    Some chip might have HW acceleration for some workload while others don't.

    example intel's (in skylake uarch)HEVC codec acceleration via GPU .

    making a generic image results in not utilising this on chip features that result software doing more work.

    i do not believe in benchmark test because they are too vanilla for sketching a image of CPU performance for real workloads
  • 0
    @FrodoSwaggins that's what my whole rant was about web browsers & video is the most generic workload, also not to mention the rendering GUI as complex as GNOME these are basic elements for any user and they should work properly.

    fact that linux distros are only optimising for ISA(like amd64) not for uarch(like skylake) means they will be never able to meet the snappiness of other OS

    it will be always

    Mac OS (sticks to uarch) > Windows( have to support AMD and intel chips ) > Linux distors(have to support every thing, so basically SW have to be shittier)
  • 0
    @FrodoSwaggins also i didn't find any linux distro yet that capitalises on optimisation for a urch , that would be the "open source" that i am dreaming of.

    quality with freedom !!
  • 1
    @hardfault Nope, it's not the CPU optimisation, which is pretty pointless. The Linux problem is that the GUI is independent from the kernel.

    As I mentioned, Windows does clever tricks with dynamic prios because it's designed together with its GUI. It's not about CPU throughput, it's thread latency.

    You'll never get this in Linux, though multi-core CPUs reduced the fallout from the SW architecture. On the upside, you can run Linux without GUI, it's just that this comes at a price.
  • 1
    @Fast-Nop in my experience i do not find windows being that optimised either , i am comparing everything to XNU.

    i use all the OS regularly i do agree windows is better few specialised tasks (3D design ) but MacOS seems to be more superior in nailing the basics and better core /Memory utilisation

    also as i am using a VM i wanted that instated if using every thing in software may be if os was optimised for uarch it used on chip peripheral to accelerate the virtualisation experience
  • 1
    @hardfault I measure only around 10% more performance for the same program under Linux compared to Windows, but Windows is still a little bit snappier. On a 10 year old CPU!

    If you have issues with a lagging Linux on modern computers, I'd check your config first, especially how aggressive the swapping is done even when you have loads of RAM. Try tuning down the swappiness parameter, that can increase snappiness.
  • 1
    @Fast-Nop i have tried the swappiness parameters and all other things, but still some times things will freeze

    right now running on VM, but i will buy a linux box i just wanted to know, baseline performance needed for my use case (vivado tools).

    but things freezes sometimes in low cpu or memory utilisation too!! so i am confused whether linux is worth it
  • 0
    @FrodoSwaggins can’t use any random distro
    Vivado tools are supported in
    red-hat,
    cent-os
    suse
    ubuntu

    I have tried unbuntu and cent-os
    now i will try lubuntu and suse

    i once wanna try paid linux to see if there are any improvements in performance
    I think i might finally go with lubuntu
    But again just testing on VM, may the best os win !!
  • 1
    Sounds like you need to stop pretending Linux is just Ubuntu and maybe give a try to manajaro or Linux Mx (both are more stripped down distros with easy setup)
  • 0
    Just an update. at this point my lubuntu vm is flying!! ,
    Let’s see if vivado works properly or not this version is based on bionic bever (18.04) so hopping every things works properly !!
  • 1
    > why bloated
    > ubuntu
Add Comment