From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 5 16:35:03 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90A381065676 for ; Fri, 5 Dec 2008 16:35:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bruce@cran.org.uk) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (muon.cran.org.uk [66.246.138.153]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65CA38FC18 for ; Fri, 5 Dec 2008 16:35:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bruce@cran.org.uk) Received: from muon.cran.org.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60F1E19002; Fri, 5 Dec 2008 11:35:02 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on muon X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=8.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.2.5 Received: from tau (unknown [66.45.161.67]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by muon.cran.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA; Fri, 5 Dec 2008 11:35:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 08:34:57 -0800 From: Bruce Cran To: af300wsm@gmail.com Message-ID: <20081205083457.283d3deb@tau> In-Reply-To: <0016e64ca7d690e38f045d45227d@google.com> References: <0016e64ca7d690e38f045d45227d@google.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.5.0 (GTK+ 2.14.4; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: Performance benchmarks pitting FreeBSD against Windows X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 16:35:03 -0000 On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 04:30:20 +0000 af300wsm@gmail.com wrote: > I'm just curious to see how it looks for my own sanity's sake. At > work, someone got the grand idea that we should move to Windoze > embedded (CE and XPe) and it's been quite discouraging I must say, > though I must admit, it's nice to actually know why Windows is ugly > underneath. From a programming perspective, it's just not simplistic. > Anyway, I digress, I'm just curious to see how things compare to > Windows on similar benchmarks to what Kris provided if its ever been > done. > The userland win32 API might be rather unpleasant but I was surprised to learn to driver interface in the kernel is actually quite nice, and isn't too dissimilar to FreeBSD in some ways. In terms of performance Windows-based machines have made it into the Top500 list of supercomputers, so at the high end performance must be acceptable at least. -- Bruce Cran