Re: [gentoo-user] Comparison between 32 bit and 64 bit
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Frank Steinmetzger war...@gmx.de wrote: What a pity though -- you just don't get 1400x1050 laptops anymore these days (or any 4:3 laptops for that matter). I also have a 1400x1050 (15-inch screen) laptop and I think this resolution and screen size are hitting the sweet-spot for a 4:3 monitor of that size...
[gentoo-user] Comparison between 32 bit and 64 bit
Hey there As I mentioned in an earlier thread, I switched from 32 to 64 bit after some convinction work done by the ML and a friend. In order to justify the switch for myself, I made some performance comparisons. So, in case anyone is interested, here are my results. The only thing I don't really like is of course the increased RAM usage. While the old installation took 400 MB of RAM after Login to KDE (Akonadi is a hog), it now takes 500. The memory meter now stands always at least at 50% (3 GB available). I will have to tune down multitasking a bit. The following items first display the command excuted (denoted by $), and then the output of time for the command; first for 32 bit and then 64 bit. All tests were done on my Core 2 Duo laptop (T7200, max. 2GHz) fixed at 1 GHz and with 3 GB of RAM. This is not a theoretical benchmark, but rather about stuff I usually to do in my every-day computing. I excluded compiling, because it involves more than just crunching. Resulting observation: there seems to be an inherent increase of about 10% in memory throughput. I was most surprised by the performance of lilypond and blender, two computing-intensive applications I tend to use regularly. I wanted to do a framerate comparison of the Java-based CPU hog Minecraft, but didn't get around to it. All the following tasks were done in ramdisk to rule out HDD hindrance. $ 7z b (7zip's own benchmark function, abridged output) 32 bit | 64 bit === RAM size:3037 MB| RAM size:3013 MB RAM usage:425 MB| RAM usage:425 MB | Dict Compressing | Decomp.| Dict Compressing | Decomp. Speed Rating | Speed Rating | Speed Rating | Speed Rating KB/s MIPS | KB/s MIPS | KB/s MIPS | KB/s MIPS | 22:1487 1446 | 19039 1719 | 22:1612 1568 | 20974 1893 23:1443 1470 | 19049 1744 | 23:1612 1642 | 20758 1900 24:1499 1612 | 18854 1749 | 24:1591 1711 | 20292 1883 25:1489 1700 | 18611 1750 | 25:1584 1809 | 20030 1884 -- Avr: 1557 1740 | 16821890 Tot: 1649 | 1786 Various compressions of the High Voltage SID collection version 56 (41356 files, 1416 folders, total dir size 307.676k according to du -s). Extract: $ unrar x hvsc.rar real0m38.582s 0m38.763s user0m36.031s 0m36.190s sys 0m2.523s0m2.496s --- neglibible Repack witz p7zip, resulting archive size 54.8 MB: $ 7za a -t7z -m0=lzma -mx=9 -mfb=64 -md=32m -ms=on hvsc.7z C64Music/ /dev/null real3m0.530s2m41.780s user5m22.359s 4m55.810s sys 2m2.973s0m3.144s --- 1/9 faster Extract from 7z: $ 7z x hvsc.7z real0m24.541s 0m21.437s user0m19.302s 0m16.929s sys 0m4.403s0m4.472s --- 1/10 faster Simple taring of the directory: $ tar cf hvsc.tar C64Music/ real0m1.334s0m1.226s user0m0.297s0m0.304s sys 0m1.020s0m0.872s --- ~1/10 faster XZing the tar, resulting archive size 54.2 MB: $ xz -k -z hvsc.tar real6m26.383s 4m31.747s user6m23.375s 4m30.969s sys 0m2.733s0m0.728s --- ~1/3 faster XZing with --extreme option (about 4% smaller archive): $ xz -e -k -z hvsc.tar real15m37.732s 10m39.348s user15m36.592s 10m38.900s sys 0m0.977s0m0.456s --- ~1/3 faster Packing in squashfs: $ mksquashfs C64Music/ hvsc.sqfs real0m57.380s 0m44.697s user1m45.136s 1m20.377s sys 0m9.059s0m6.116s --- ~1/4 faster Some memory shuffling: $ dd if=/dev/urandom of=random bs=1M count=500 real2m0.306s 1m49.348s user0m0.003s 0m0.000s sys 2m0.292s 1m49.315s --- 1/12 faster $ cp random r2 real0m1.069s 0m0.917s user0m0.000s 0m0.004s sys 0m1.067s 0m0.908s --- 1/10 faster Compile Bach's Christmas Oratorio, Tenor part, 16 pages A5: $ lilypond wo.ly real0m31.430s 0m23.737s user0m30.711s 0m23.129s sys 0m0.717s 0m0.592s --- 1/3 faster Compile Oratorio de Noël by Saint-Saëns, 4 voices, 16 pages A4: $ lilypond noel.lyk real0m41.575s 0m26.494s user0m41.177s 0m25.870s sys 0m0.390s 0m0.604s --- 1/3 faster Optimising a PNG (photo of Orion nebula, 1400x1050 pixel): $ optipng -o9 Orion.png real0m23.491s 0m21.337s user0m23.465s 0m21.281s sys 0m0.027s 0m0.008s --- 1/10 faster Encoding a video file to x264 (1280x960, 1600 frames, no sound): First pass: $ mencoder bike.flv -ovc x264 -x264encopts bitrate=2000:pass=1 -nosound -o /dev/null real1m57.379s 1m44.500s user3m48.048s 3m19.728s sys 0m0.837s 0m0.796s --- 1/8 faster
Re: [gentoo-user] Comparison between 32 bit and 64 bit
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Frank Steinmetzger war...@gmx.de wrote: As I mentioned in an earlier thread, I switched from 32 to 64 bit after some convinction work done by the ML and a friend. In order to justify the switch for myself, I made some performance comparisons. So, in case anyone is interested, here are my results. Thanks, it is always interesting to see real-world results.
Re: [gentoo-user] Comparison between 32 bit and 64 bit
Am Montag, 13. August 2012, 20:55:23 schrieb Frank Steinmetzger: Hey there As I mentioned in an earlier thread, I switched from 32 to 64 bit after some convinction work done by the ML and a friend. In order to justify the switch for myself, I made some performance comparisons. So, in case anyone is interested, here are my results. The only thing I don't really like is of course the increased RAM usage. While the old installation took 400 MB of RAM after Login to KDE (Akonadi is a hog), it now takes 500. The memory meter now stands always at least at 50% (3 GB available). I will have to tune down multitasking a bit. The following items first display the command excuted (denoted by $), and then the output of time for the command; first for 32 bit and then 64 bit. All tests were done on my Core 2 Duo laptop (T7200, max. 2GHz) fixed at 1 GHz and with 3 GB of RAM. This is not a theoretical benchmark, but rather about stuff I usually to do in my every-day computing. I excluded compiling, because it involves more than just crunching. Resulting observation: there seems to be an inherent increase of about 10% in memory throughput. I was most surprised by the performance of lilypond and blender, two computing-intensive applications I tend to use regularly. I wanted to do a framerate comparison of the Java-based CPU hog Minecraft, but didn't get around to it. All the following tasks were done in ramdisk to rule out HDD hindrance. $ 7z b (7zip's own benchmark function, abridged output) 32 bit | 64 bit === RAM size:3037 MB| RAM size:3013 MB RAM usage:425 MB| RAM usage:425 MB Dict Compressing | Decomp.| Dict Compressing | Decomp. Speed Rating | Speed Rating | Speed Rating | Speed Rating KB/s MIPS | KB/s MIPS | KB/s MIPS | KB/s MIPS 22:1487 1446 | 19039 1719 | 22:1612 1568 | 20974 1893 23:1443 1470 | 19049 1744 | 23:1612 1642 | 20758 1900 24:1499 1612 | 18854 1749 | 24:1591 1711 | 20292 1883 25:1489 1700 | 18611 1750 | 25:1584 1809 | 20030 1884 -- Avr: 1557 1740 | 16821890 Tot: 1649 | 1786 Various compressions of the High Voltage SID collection version 56 (41356 files, 1416 folders, total dir size 307.676k according to du -s). Extract: $ unrar x hvsc.rar real0m38.582s 0m38.763s user0m36.031s 0m36.190s sys 0m2.523s0m2.496s --- neglibible Repack witz p7zip, resulting archive size 54.8 MB: $ 7za a -t7z -m0=lzma -mx=9 -mfb=64 -md=32m -ms=on hvsc.7z C64Music/ /dev/null real3m0.530s2m41.780s user5m22.359s 4m55.810s sys 2m2.973s0m3.144s --- 1/9 faster Extract from 7z: $ 7z x hvsc.7z real0m24.541s 0m21.437s user0m19.302s 0m16.929s sys 0m4.403s0m4.472s --- 1/10 faster Simple taring of the directory: $ tar cf hvsc.tar C64Music/ real0m1.334s0m1.226s user0m0.297s0m0.304s sys 0m1.020s0m0.872s --- ~1/10 faster XZing the tar, resulting archive size 54.2 MB: $ xz -k -z hvsc.tar real6m26.383s 4m31.747s user6m23.375s 4m30.969s sys 0m2.733s0m0.728s --- ~1/3 faster XZing with --extreme option (about 4% smaller archive): $ xz -e -k -z hvsc.tar real15m37.732s 10m39.348s user15m36.592s 10m38.900s sys 0m0.977s0m0.456s --- ~1/3 faster Packing in squashfs: $ mksquashfs C64Music/ hvsc.sqfs real0m57.380s 0m44.697s user1m45.136s 1m20.377s sys 0m9.059s0m6.116s --- ~1/4 faster Some memory shuffling: $ dd if=/dev/urandom of=random bs=1M count=500 real2m0.306s 1m49.348s user0m0.003s 0m0.000s sys 2m0.292s 1m49.315s --- 1/12 faster $ cp random r2 real0m1.069s 0m0.917s user0m0.000s 0m0.004s sys 0m1.067s 0m0.908s --- 1/10 faster Compile Bach's Christmas Oratorio, Tenor part, 16 pages A5: $ lilypond wo.ly real0m31.430s 0m23.737s user0m30.711s 0m23.129s sys 0m0.717s 0m0.592s --- 1/3 faster Compile Oratorio de Noël by Saint-Saëns, 4 voices, 16 pages A4: $ lilypond noel.lyk real0m41.575s 0m26.494s user0m41.177s 0m25.870s sys 0m0.390s 0m0.604s --- 1/3 faster Optimising a PNG (photo of Orion nebula, 1400x1050 pixel): $ optipng -o9 Orion.png real0m23.491s 0m21.337s user0m23.465s 0m21.281s sys 0m0.027s 0m0.008s --- 1/10 faster Encoding a video file to x264 (1280x960, 1600 frames, no sound): First pass: $ mencoder bike.flv -ovc x264 -x264encopts bitrate=2000:pass=1 -nosound -o /dev/null real
Re: [gentoo-user] Comparison between 32 bit and 64 bit
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 12:20:04AM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: Am Montag, 13. August 2012, 20:55:23 schrieb Frank Steinmetzger: Hey there As I mentioned in an earlier thread, I switched from 32 to 64 bit after some convinction work done by the ML and a friend. In order to justify the switch for myself, I made some performance comparisons. So, in case anyone is interested, here are my results. The only thing I don't really like is of course the increased RAM usage. While the old installation took 400 MB of RAM after Login to KDE (Akonadi is a hog), it now takes 500. The memory meter now stands always at least at 50% (3 GB available). I will have to tune down multitasking a bit. [major snippage] so all in all you got performance improvements you had to spend several hundred of dollars for just through recompiling. Should give you food for thought. I don't understand that sentence. Where did I spend 100s of $$? Oh and the ram? Ram is cheap. Get yourseld 8gb. Costs as much as a good lunch. Nah, I won't upgrade this laptop anymore. It's 6 years old, the heatpipe is worn out, so I can't go full-power anymore, the backlight is getting weaker and the keyboard is falling apart. I don't have too little RAM, I just don't have that much by today's standard. (It came shipped with 1 Gig BTW). I'm gonna build me a nice i5-based minitower once I can afford it. *dream* What a pity though -- you just don't get 1400x1050 laptops anymore these days (or any 4:3 laptops for that matter). Or a couple of beers on friday night. I don't drink beer. ;-p -- Gruß | Greetings | Qapla' Please do not share anything from, with or about me with any Facebook service. Size does not always matter: while whales are almost extinct, the ants fare quite well. pgpvDXnOeXyag.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Comparison between 32 bit and 64 bit
Am Dienstag, 14. August 2012, 01:18:20 schrieb Frank Steinmetzger: On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 12:20:04AM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: Am Montag, 13. August 2012, 20:55:23 schrieb Frank Steinmetzger: Hey there As I mentioned in an earlier thread, I switched from 32 to 64 bit after some convinction work done by the ML and a friend. In order to justify the switch for myself, I made some performance comparisons. So, in case anyone is interested, here are my results. The only thing I don't really like is of course the increased RAM usage. While the old installation took 400 MB of RAM after Login to KDE (Akonadi is a hog), it now takes 500. The memory meter now stands always at least at 50% (3 GB available). I will have to tune down multitasking a bit. [major snippage] so all in all you got performance improvements you had to spend several hundred of dollars for just through recompiling. Should give you food for thought. I don't understand that sentence. Where did I spend 100s of $$? you didn't. You got the equivalent of a major cpu/mobo/ram upgrade in performance improvements - for free. Oh and the ram? Ram is cheap. Get yourseld 8gb. Costs as much as a good lunch. Nah, I won't upgrade this laptop anymore. It's 6 years old, the heatpipe is worn out, so I can't go full-power anymore, the backlight is getting weaker and the keyboard is falling apart. I don't have too little RAM, I just don't have that much by today's standard. (It came shipped with 1 Gig BTW). I'm gonna build me a nice i5-based minitower once I can afford it. *dream* What a pity though -- you just don't get 1400x1050 laptops anymore these days (or any 4:3 laptops for that matter). Or a couple of beers on friday night. I don't drink beer. ;-p -- #163933
Re: [gentoo-user] Comparison between 32 bit and 64 bit
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 02:23:25AM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: so all in all you got performance improvements you had to spend several hundred of dollars for just through recompiling. Should give you food for thought. I don't understand that sentence. Where did I spend 100s of $$? you didn't. You got the equivalent of a major cpu/mobo/ram upgrade in performance improvements - for free. Ahh, now I see that subclause in the middle there. :) -- Gruß | Greetings | Qapla' Please do not share anything from, with or about me with any Facebook service. Poverty is not a disgrace, but a bloody nuisance. pgpQRbZdFjzV6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Comparison between 32 bit and 64 bit
Am Dienstag, 14. August 2012, 02:39:44 schrieb Frank Steinmetzger: On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 02:23:25AM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: so all in all you got performance improvements you had to spend several hundred of dollars for just through recompiling. Should give you food for thought. I don't understand that sentence. Where did I spend 100s of $$? you didn't. You got the equivalent of a major cpu/mobo/ram upgrade in performance improvements - for free. Ahh, now I see that subclause in the middle there. :) yeah, I am babbling and writing crap. It is 3 in the morning and I am sick. Not a good combination for well thought, grammatically correct writing. -- #163933
