On Tue, Jan 05, 1999 at 10:00:52AM -0600, Paul Victor Novarese
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If you are hypothesizing that you get better performance with Win9x, my
> (unscientific) experience indicates otherwise. On the same machine, I get
> about 5% better performance with Linux. I would *guess* the difference is
> caused by the increased overhead of Win9x's GUI and shoddy multitasking.
> Performance under Linux drops a bit when running X, but still beats Win9x
> significantly. YMMV.
On a somewhat related note, I've also found the client to be almost exactly
the same speed on Win9x and Linux when both are completely idle (on my dual
boot P233 notebook). I don't have X on it yet, so I can't comment accurately
on how a busy GUI impacts performance.
However, the Linux client running under FreeBSD 3.0-R's Linux emulation mode is
noticably slower than the Win9x client (on my dual boot Celeron 300A desktop).
On the order of 25-35% slower. This isn't really surprising - it is an
emulator after all, and that'll always add overhead - but a little
disappointing.
Bryan
--
Bryan Fullerton http://www.samurai.com/
Owner, Lead Consultant http://www.feh.net/
Samurai Consulting http://www.icomm.ca/
"No, we don't do seppuku." Can you feel the Ohmu call?
