Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 19 Feb 2012 01:58:38 -0500
From:      Super Bisquit <superbisquit@gmail.com>
To:        "Kevin H. Patterson" <kpatterson.home@gmail.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD PowerPC ML <freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE on PowerMac Dual G5
Message-ID:  <CA%2BWntOsYiKaygJBg_iQBkZ9YX1JjGF0_MnbzJwHqOxyK2uBnYg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D7B47E5-6A33-4426-8186-D5E9D5C9B32E@khptech.com>
References:  <3934AD65-E01C-4DDD-8BDC-F52C6AE3655F@khptech.com> <CA%2BWntOtKvc6HMDoMNQj6AQtiA5kOXGrZqcnFcssuGs6nv_EimQ@mail.gmail.com> <4D7B47E5-6A33-4426-8186-D5E9D5C9B32E@khptech.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
How about  real world benchmarks of compiling and running programs?
You're going to get different benchmarks on different operating
systems on the same machine. OpenBSD runs better than FreeBSD or Linux
but you need more memory and a processor of 500MHz or greater on the
PowerPC architecture. Everything affects the outcome.

If there is no window manager, the response is better. If the kernel
and base system is not "testing," the response is better. Et al....

You'd be better off comparing the performance of two machines running
a real world application such as S4P.



On 2/19/12, Kevin H. Patterson <kpatterson.home@gmail.com> wrote:
> I realize ubench is a far cry from comprehensive benchmarks. However,
> although the absolute numbers are meaningless, it *is* designed to compare
> systems directly with each other.
>
> There is no good reason I can think of why the *exact same code* for ubench
> under macosx 10.5 and ubench under freebsd 9.0 would show a relative speed
> of 1/3 when running on freebsd. uBench is a simple program, written in C.
> While the calculations involved might be senseless, there is, again, no good
> reason why freebsd should run this "senseless" code at 1/3 of the speed that
> it runs under macosx.
>
> This is not my imagination; I'd be happy to compare some other benchmarks if
> you like.
>
> On Feb 19, 2012, at 12:15 AM, Super Bisquit wrote:
>
>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/url.cgi?ports/benchmarks/ubench/pkg-descr
>>
>> Notice that the description uses the word "senseless" more than once.
>>
>> Try compiling a program or a set of programs.  On a low end B&W, I was
>> able to compile firefox plus a few other applications. POWER/PowerPC
>> is known for performance.
>> The architecture is used in gaming systems for reason that it can pass
>> instructions through once they are "learned." This may be a simplistic
>> explanation of load-store but it is one you should be aware of.
>>
>> Both the Power and Power64 releases are Tier 2 and are worked on by a
>> small group within the FreeBSD community.
>>
>> You can change the flags of make in /etc/make.conf if you wish.
>>
>> On 2/18/12, Kevin H. Patterson <kpatterson.home@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I've taken an interest lately in running FreeBSD on the powerpc64
>>> architecture. I have access to a dual 2.5 GHz PowerMac G5, and I've
>>> successfully got FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE up and running on it.
>>>
>>> Only one thing seems amiss so far... it feels *very* SLOW. I realize this
>>> is
>>> an older machine, but it feels much too slow for a dual G5. Compiling
>>> seems
>>> to take forever, and top shows ~50% or more "system" CPU usage when doing
>>> almost anything other than sitting idle. Furthermore, the system fans
>>> never
>>> speed up, but run at the lowest speed even when the system is under full
>>> load. I have tried both enabling and disabling powerd support, with no
>>> effect.
>>>
>>> For a quick sanity check, I installed ubench (0.32) from ports. The
>>> numbers
>>> were quite disappointing: 109870 CPU / 50527 MEM multiprocessor, and
>>> 55433
>>> CPU / 30863 MEM single-processor.
>>>
>>> For comparison, I ran ubench (0.32 from MacPorts) under Mac OS X 10.5.8
>>> on
>>> the same machine. This time, the fans do ramp up, and the numbers are
>>> *WAY*
>>> better: 277207 CPU / 317119 MEM multi-processor, and 141021 CPU / 284113
>>> MEM
>>> single-processor.
>>>
>>> As you can see, all is not well. I am wondering what is slowing FreeBSD
>>> down
>>> on this machine. I have tried both GENERIC and my own kernel config. It
>>> feels like the CPU and or bus speed is clocked down perhaps to the most
>>> energy-saving level. Maybe this is where openfirmware leaves it after
>>> boot?
>>> Also interesting is to note the drastic *single-processor* ubench
>>> difference
>>> between macosx and freebsd. To me this looks like a low clock-speed
>>> smoking
>>> gun.
>>>
>>> I also noticed that the kernel build includes flags like -msoft-float and
>>> -mno-altivec...
>>>
>>> I am interested in any build or config tweaks that might be in order. I
>>> am
>>> also more than happy to debug and get to the bottom of this. Any ideas?
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>> Kevin H. Patterson
>>> KHPtech
>>>
>>> kevpatt@khptech.com
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org mailing list
>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ppc
>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ppc-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>>>
>
>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2BWntOsYiKaygJBg_iQBkZ9YX1JjGF0_MnbzJwHqOxyK2uBnYg>