Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux Intel Chipset Comparison

Posted by timothy on from the don't-want-those-nt-performance-levels dept.

Diabolus writes: "AnandTech have done a comparison of Intel-CPU chipsets on Linux here. It talks about performance, stability and support issues for the various chipsets; apparently an Athlon chipset comparison is due shortly. Nice to see that it's not just 3D performance now -- Linux is becoming more mainstream among the h/w enthusiast crowd." This is a cool followup to see to AnandTech's October comparison of video cards under Linux.

1 of 38 comments (clear)

  1. Re:More accurate? by evanbd · · Score: 3
    In a very fundamental sense, they can't be. Period

    By definition, what a benchmark is is just a measurement of the speed of a particular piece of hardware at running a particular piece of software. That includes the OS. It makes sense to compare different pieces of software on the same hardware to compare how fast they are at solving a particular problem, or the same software on different hardware to see how fast the hardware is at a particular task, or even different pieces of hardware and software performing a similar task. The win98 benchmarks are (barring bad benchmarking techniques, etc) as accurate at measuring the win98 solution to a problem as the linux ones are at measuring the linux solution to the same problem. They may be slower, or faster, but they fundamentaly are no more accurate. They both tell how fast the hardware/software configuration is at a task.

    What really matters is what task you care about, and I'm guessing you care about linux doing something, so linux benchmarks would have more meaning to you. For various reasons, I run windows (and can't switch easily enough to linux, but that's a different discussion), so the windows ones matter more to me. However, I am quite glad to see both being run.