Posted by: Anonymous
[ip: 88.184.67.36]
on September 17, 2008 10:41 AM
"Apart from the usual shilling for ATI/AMD and Solaris there are the remarkably unscientific conclusions drawn from benchmarks which are essentially meaningless ... many of the video card articles draw conclusions about which kernel or driver is faster based on a 2 or 3 frame difference (i.e. a insignificant difference both statistically and practically)."
That's a _hardware_ review site. Most, if not all hardware review sites (the one geared towards Windows usersn since Phoronics is the only hw review site to cater to Linux users you can only compare to how things are done in the Windows hw review world) draw conclusions based on a 2 or 3 frame reference...
"Other articles like Today's article on the various eeePC distros which show significant differences in performance numbers between distros are essentially skin deep offering no insightful analysis of why there are any differences at all (i.e. why would Fedora be so much faster at compiling then the others?)."
Again, Phoronics is a _hardware_ review site. When Windows review sites compare the performances of a meaningless title like Crisis between 2 different .01 driver releases, or between SP1 beta 0.3 and SP2 RC, they don't explain anything about what could have caused the performance difference. At all. For the difference between distributions, it would involve the distributions developers to try to figure themselves what could cause the performance difference (and it's no easy task). With the Phoronics test suite they can now try to attempt understanding it (if they really want to spend the time building the distro after each tiny patch and try to figure what could be the problem). Don't ask one man to do what none of the 50+ developer distros is doing.
Once you understand what Phoronics is about, it's actually a really good site. Even though it's a hw review site, some of the article they run on graphic drivers and Xorg are really insightful (and remember, they're a bonus - and even though Phoronics is a hw site their "software" articles are some of the best).
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Michael Larabel talks about Phoronix
Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 88.184.67.36] on September 17, 2008 10:41 AMThat's a _hardware_ review site. Most, if not all hardware review sites (the one geared towards Windows usersn since Phoronics is the only hw review site to cater to Linux users you can only compare to how things are done in the Windows hw review world) draw conclusions based on a 2 or 3 frame reference...
"Other articles like Today's article on the various eeePC distros which show significant differences in performance numbers between distros are essentially skin deep offering no insightful analysis of why there are any differences at all (i.e. why would Fedora be so much faster at compiling then the others?)."
Again, Phoronics is a _hardware_ review site. When Windows review sites compare the performances of a meaningless title like Crisis between 2 different .01 driver releases, or between SP1 beta 0.3 and SP2 RC, they don't explain anything about what could have caused the performance difference. At all. For the difference between distributions, it would involve the distributions developers to try to figure themselves what could cause the performance difference (and it's no easy task). With the Phoronics test suite they can now try to attempt understanding it (if they really want to spend the time building the distro after each tiny patch and try to figure what could be the problem). Don't ask one man to do what none of the 50+ developer distros is doing.
Once you understand what Phoronics is about, it's actually a really good site. Even though it's a hw review site, some of the article they run on graphic drivers and Xorg are really insightful (and remember, they're a bonus - and even though Phoronics is a hw site their "software" articles are some of the best).
#