Taken from - http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23735.html
The author does seem rather anti-Microsoft, and The Register isnt noted as a hardware/software testing website, but still some interesting results.
But I expect someone will say he was smoking crack when doing the tests...
One Intel D850MVSE mobo with Northwood P4; 512M PC800 RDRAM; two Maxtor D740X 20G ATA-133 drives on the mobo's onboard ATA-100 controller, one booting Win-XP Pro on FAT and one booting SuSE 7.3 Pro on ReiserFS and both installed clean and subsequently patched; and a 64M DDR GeForce AGP4.
The Windows drive is patched with whatever the MS auto-update cloak-and-dagger process does to it. The Linux drive is patched to kernel 2.4.17. The video and OpenGL drivers for both OS's were upgraded with the most recent files from Nvidia's Web site.
On the Windows drive I installed all the Intel chipset drivers and the Application Accelerator. The Linux kernel is reasonably optimized for the HDD and the P4, but with APIC disabled, as it just won't run on the 850 mobo otherwise.
Mode: 1024x786
Color depth: 16-bit
Lighting: lightmap
Geometric detail: high
Texture Detail: maximum
Texture quality: 16-bit
Filter: trilinear
Win-XP returned an average of 72.7 FPS, which is worse than I'd expect from a P3 800 on '98 with about 128M RAM, or a 486DX 100 on Win 3.1 with about 16M RAM. (You see the pattern here....)
Linux returned an average of 80.2 FPS, which is significantly better, though hardly brilliant. But let's keep in mind that the system I'm using here is virtually Linux-hostile. The next one won't be.
With even less detail, further reducing dependency on the graphics card, we got better numbers from the CPU. The breakdown was similar, though Windows narrowed the gap a bit.
Mode: 640x480
Color depth: 16-bit
Lighting: vertex
Geometric detail: low
Texture Detail: minimum
Texture quality: 16-bit
Filter: bilinear
This gave us averages of 272.2 FPS on Windows and 304.7 on Linux.
The Windows drive is patched with whatever the MS auto-update cloak-and-dagger process does to it. The Linux drive is patched to kernel 2.4.17. The video and OpenGL drivers for both OS's were upgraded with the most recent files from Nvidia's Web site.
On the Windows drive I installed all the Intel chipset drivers and the Application Accelerator. The Linux kernel is reasonably optimized for the HDD and the P4, but with APIC disabled, as it just won't run on the 850 mobo otherwise.
Mode: 1024x786
Color depth: 16-bit
Lighting: lightmap
Geometric detail: high
Texture Detail: maximum
Texture quality: 16-bit
Filter: trilinear
Win-XP returned an average of 72.7 FPS, which is worse than I'd expect from a P3 800 on '98 with about 128M RAM, or a 486DX 100 on Win 3.1 with about 16M RAM. (You see the pattern here....)
Linux returned an average of 80.2 FPS, which is significantly better, though hardly brilliant. But let's keep in mind that the system I'm using here is virtually Linux-hostile. The next one won't be.
With even less detail, further reducing dependency on the graphics card, we got better numbers from the CPU. The breakdown was similar, though Windows narrowed the gap a bit.
Mode: 640x480
Color depth: 16-bit
Lighting: vertex
Geometric detail: low
Texture Detail: minimum
Texture quality: 16-bit
Filter: bilinear
This gave us averages of 272.2 FPS on Windows and 304.7 on Linux.
But I expect someone will say he was smoking crack when doing the tests...
Comment