The problem with linux (as desktop) performance is not the kernel!
by ubersetis93 from LinuxQuestions.org on (#5AMBC)
Hello all,
I just want to talk about the performance of linux (as desktop) compared to windows 10. Regardless of the graphics cards supports, many people including me believe that windows outperform linux in performance. Some believe that the problem is that the linux kernel is meant to be for servers where the process scheduler of linux Completely Fair Scheduler (CFS) is designed to be good for batch or server work, but not for interactivity. Therefore, alternative schedulers are there such as BFS and MuQSS which is made by Con Kolivas. I have tried BFS but it doesn't differ a lot in performance nor in interactivity.
I strongly believe that the problem is not the kernel. The real problem is that most linux softwares such as Desktop Env. and other services are not CPU cache friendly! I heard that windows team started to refactor and change the code of some important softwares to be more CPU cache friendly and they noticed some improvements in performance. In the linux world, Clear Linux from Intel is one example where CPU cache optimizing is considered and many people feels that Clear Linux is so responsive and fast! The reason is that Intel has done many CPU cache optimizations (i.e. they changed some software code to be faster and efficient utilizing CPU caches). We should adapt the Clear Linux approach, and we need to make other famous distros as performant as Clear Linux and windows.
Thank you
I just want to talk about the performance of linux (as desktop) compared to windows 10. Regardless of the graphics cards supports, many people including me believe that windows outperform linux in performance. Some believe that the problem is that the linux kernel is meant to be for servers where the process scheduler of linux Completely Fair Scheduler (CFS) is designed to be good for batch or server work, but not for interactivity. Therefore, alternative schedulers are there such as BFS and MuQSS which is made by Con Kolivas. I have tried BFS but it doesn't differ a lot in performance nor in interactivity.
I strongly believe that the problem is not the kernel. The real problem is that most linux softwares such as Desktop Env. and other services are not CPU cache friendly! I heard that windows team started to refactor and change the code of some important softwares to be more CPU cache friendly and they noticed some improvements in performance. In the linux world, Clear Linux from Intel is one example where CPU cache optimizing is considered and many people feels that Clear Linux is so responsive and fast! The reason is that Intel has done many CPU cache optimizations (i.e. they changed some software code to be faster and efficient utilizing CPU caches). We should adapt the Clear Linux approach, and we need to make other famous distros as performant as Clear Linux and windows.
Thank you