Slashdot Mirror
How Windows 10 Performs On a 12-inch MacBook
An anonymous reader writes: As Microsoft prepares for the launch of Windows 10, review sites have been performing all sorts of benchmarks on the tech preview to evaluate how well the operating system will run. But now a computer science student named Alex King has made the most logical performance evaluation of all: testing Windows 10's performance on a 2015 MacBook. He says, "Here's the real kicker: it's fast. It's smooth. It renders at 60FPS unless you have a lot going on. It's unequivocally better than performance on OS X, further leading me to believe that Apple really needs to overhaul how animations are done. Even when I turn Transparency off in OS X, Mission Control isn't completely smooth. Here, even after some Aero Glass transparency has been added in, everything is smooth. It's remarkable, and it makes me believe in the 12-inch MacBook more than ever before. So maybe it's ironic that in some regards, the new MacBook runs Windows 10 (a prerelease version, at that) better than it runs OS X."
Hey everybody! I found the guy who keeps marking every sentence [citation needed] on Wikipedia!
True, though there is some precedence. OS-X does not seem to be particularly zippy in the few cross platform app benchmarks that are to be found. A good example is DAW bench's test on Cubase, Protools, and Kontakt: http://dawbench.com/win7-v-osx.... What you see is that Cubase has a much more efficient engine than ProTools (no surprise) and that on Windows either one gets a lot more polyphony than the Mac. At any given buffer size (lower buffers are harder to deal with) Windows did better.
Pretty good test too since you are dealing with tools that have long been cross platform. Kontakt has been cross platform for its entire life, Pro Tools was Mac only until version 5 (1998ish), since when it has been cross platform, and Cubase has been cross platform since back in the DOS and Atari ST days. All the software has long development histories on both platforms, yet Windows gives superior results.
None of this means OS-X is unusable or anything, but it doesn't appear to have the performance Windows does, when pushed.
Hey everybody! I found the guy who keeps marking every sentence [citation needed] on Wikipedia!
[citation needed] :P
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
Oh, it is fast, trouble is the energy management is so poor the processor is overheating so the fans go turbo-mode. Not a pleasant experience.
Welcome to the fantastic world of "embed controllers" (EC). The small custom chip sitting in the middle of a laptop, and in charge with all the peculiar functionality that are peculiar to this laptop, but don't exist in standard desktop/workstations. (like battery management, etc.)
The problem is that there is absolutely no standardisation of ECs. Every model is its own special snow flake (and when I say "model" I mean model of motherboard. In some case, specially consumer oriented laptop, some product range might have the same model name and the same plastic case and looks absolutely the same from the outside, but is actually different revisions which looks completely different under the hood, depending on which parts were the cheapest during the month this one was produced) (that's why for the same "Model" you have a few different BIOS downloads depending on part number, revision, etc.)
To get it working the manufacturer could write a specific driver. Usually this is done by the hardware manufacturer who write drivers for the target OS they have. Most laptop manufacturer write drivers for Windows, because they produce windows laptops. Here it's an *Apple* don't expect much.
To make things worse: usually these aren't your garden variety of drivers. Very often, platform functionality like ECs are handled by ACPI (now part of UEFI). i.e.: by firmware that is byte-code interpreted by the running system. In theory it should make things more OS-agnostic and portable. In practice it's a nightmare as every ACPI implementation is buggy in its own way, and every OS has a different variety of quirks. So writers of firmware (BIOS/UEFI/ACPI) for laptops have to release new versions of firmware (again, one per model of EC on mother board).
You can count on big brands to release a new BIOS pack download to cover the major flavours of Windows that they ship with this model. Maybe cover an update.
But don't count on engineers working for Apple to scram to release a new firmware update, just because some random schmuck decided to install a newer version of windows whose ACPI implementation is broken in a subtly different way than the preceding.
Their official OS that they support is OS X, they might have decided to add as a bonus a version or two supported as part of their Boot Camp offering.
And that's about it, don't count much more from them.
Funny that *windows* is now at the receiving end of this firmware/EC problem, that usually haunts Linux users on laptop that mostly run Windows.
(The problem that you report trying to run Windows on Apple hardware ? That's the daily plight of Linux users on most Windows laptops).
--------------
Also that might be the reason of the performance gain and "overall smoothness" reported by TFA:
- when running under OS X, the OS balances performance with battery life, thermal limits, etc. hardware runs at an equilibrium. Thus isn't as smooth as it theoretically could, because OS decides to save a bit power.
- Windows 10 has very probably an ACPI implementation that is subtly broken in a different way that its predecessor. Power management doesn't work. GPU is run at max power profile, CPU is run at max frequency. Results are probably smoother, but if the guy had actually carred to measure it in details, he would probably have observed shittier battery life.
Relevant quote (emphasis by me):
Yup definitely a possibility that shitty battery life and heat that you describe and the high performance that the author got are the
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
It has long appeared to me that all the best talent at Cupertino is being assigned to work on iOS, and OSX is suffering as a result.
One upon a time, a new MacOSX release meant you might need to put more RAM in the box, but even some seven-year-old piece of hardware would go faster, and there would be fewer bugs or crashes. [Consider a late G3 iMac, upgraded all the way from Public Beta to Tiger.] These days, you put more RAM in (if you can if you have a machine old enough that Apple didn't solder all the memory in during manufacture) just to make it less sluggish.
Drawing performance seems especially poor, which makes me wonder: if I bought a top-end top-of-the-range Mac Pro, would it be any better at being a desktop computer than what I have now? I'm not sure it would.
Apple has been optimising OS X for years, but not for Graphics Performance. They've been optimising it for longer battery duration.
It's been years since I've needed or even noticed needing better graphics performance yet battery performance of OS X pure versus Windows? Oh yeah, THAT I notice. On the occasions I forget a charger I have to minimise running Windows or I'll be running out of battery at least twice as fast as when using OS X. I can get work 7 Hours using just the battery on my rMBP with occasional excursions to Windows to check mail but or use corporate windows only tools but running windows will only give me 3 hours. Windows isn't even doing much, it just does it all the time & never lets the CPU sleep for any significant time - see here for reasons why.
Yeah, the pure graphics performance may be poorer on OS X. Most people don't care as long as it's good enough.
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue