Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 16:09:24 -0800 (PST) From: Alex <garbanzo@hooked.net> To: "Jonathan M. Bresler" <jmb@freebsd.org> Cc: Wei Weng <wweng@stevens-tech.edu>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: performance differences Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971123160831.17923A-100000@zippy.dyn.ml.org> In-Reply-To: <199711232032.MAA29689@hub.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 23 Nov 1997, Jonathan M. Bresler wrote: > Wei Weng wrote: > > > > check out : > > http://www.techweb.com/se/directlink.cgi?INW19970901S0125 > > for the result of performance tests on linux freebsd and windowsNT. > > FreeBSD was using 1/2 the memory used by the other systems. > FreeBSD was conservative in determinghte amount of memory > installed. The amount used is reported in the startup messages, > which the reviewers must have missed. > > they did not do the minimum of building a kernel to use > the larger amount of memory available The whole point of this was to test a machine "out of the box". I.E. doing as little customization as possible. If they had tested with 3.0 (a.k.a. -current) which sizes >64M OTH, methinks that FreeBSD would have come out on top. - alex
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.971123160831.17923A-100000>