Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Operating Systems Software Linux IT

Phoronix Releases Linux Benchmarking Distribution 31

Posted by timothy
from the medium-infrastructure dept.
Bitnit writes "Phoronix has released a major update to their automated Linux benchmarking software, the Phoronix Test Suite, and more interestingly they have released their own distribution that's designed for hardware testing and benchmarking on Linux. With PTS Desktop Live they provide this Linux distribution that's to run only from a live environment off a DVD / USB key and then allows their benchmarking software to run — and only that — on this standardized software stack, which makes hardware comparisons a lot easier."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Phoronix Releases Linux Benchmarking Distribution

Comments Filter:
  • Problems... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Darkness404 (1287218) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @08:34AM (#28940033)
    A lot of speed issues have to do with drivers and not the actual hardware itself. I wonder if this takes that into the equation.
    • Does it matter? As a user, I don't care if poor performance is caused by bad drivers or by bad hardware.
      • Re:Problems... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by jd (1658) <<moc.oohay> <ta> <kapimi>> on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @05:35PM (#28964573) Homepage Journal

        Well, to an extent you do. A bad driver is much easier to upgrade/replace than bad hardware, especially if the hardware is built into the motherboard. In the case of audio (a classic Linux problem), if ALSA has a bad/missing driver you are still free to use OSS, and vice versa. If X has a bad video driver, there may be one in GGI or in the Linux framebuffer that you can use. On the other hand, if the chipset is crud, all the software options in the world won't help you.

  • I'm afraid! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Parker Lewis (999165) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @08:37AM (#28940081)

    "The only required dependencies for the Phoronix Test Suite on Linux systems is PHP 5.x CLI"

  • chris@ubuntu:~$ phoronix-test-suite gui

    Fatal error: Class 'GtkWindow' not found in /usr/share/phoronix-test-suite/pts-core/objects/gtk/pts_gtk_window.php on line 23

    Not working too well... :(

    • Re: (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      perhaps they could port to QT . . .

    • I think the PHP Gtk binding are still a compile from source mission on ubuntu, there was not a package available when I needed it a few weeks ago. Plus if you leave the module in your default php config, it breaks php (as in won't run even non Gtk scripts) whenever it it run from somewhere without a window manager available (ssh, cron, etc).

      All in all a pain in the ass.

      • by Kryai (976997)

        I think the PHP Gtk binding are still a compile from source mission on ubuntu, there was not a package available when I needed it a few weeks ago. Plus if you leave the module in your default php config, it breaks php (as in won't run even non Gtk scripts) whenever it it run from somewhere without a window manager available (ssh, cron, etc).

        All in all a pain in the ass.

        I'm about to give up installing the requirements for a GUI on CentOS 5.3 trying to get php-gtk installed is quite the venture.

  • Wrong benchmarks (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    While the suite is good for benchmarking regressions between kernel versions (across distros for example), it's not a very good distribution comparing tool in my opinion.

    I'd like to see benchmarks such as:

    * Time from bootloader to login window/desktop
    * Time from desktop to webbrowser fully loaded Google or something
    * Time it takes to open an Excel sheet with OpenOffice
    * Amount of swap space used under normal desktop cirmumstances (some ~15 FF tabs, few sheets, docs, mail reader, etc)

    It doesn't matter if it

  • LiveCD/DVD's are always slower then a proper HD install.

    Will this not make peoples bechmark results slower ? This would invalidate the benchmark results.
  • VirtualBox (Score:5, Funny)

    by owlman17 (871857) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @08:56AM (#28940343)

    Sounds great! I'll download it and try to run it in a VM.

  • Great! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Simian Man (1472911) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @09:03AM (#28940445)
    Now anyone can conduct highly inaccurate bench-marking tests and publish the results every few months!

The tree of research must from time to time be refreshed with the blood of bean counters. -- Alan Kay

Working...