2008/1/12, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek <jakub.rusinek@xxxxxxxxx>: > do we need to support legacy cpu's by i386 compilation? > i586 would make fedora faster even 3 times. > difference is noticeable. > > -- > Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek > http://liviopl.jogger.pl/ > -- > fedora-devel-list mailing list > fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list You really are making a fool of yourself around here. i can't imagine that the architecture has anything to do with performance. but this [1] will most likely explain why openSuSE is so "much" faster than fedora. Fedora used to use caching (preload) as well but it wasn't offering speed improvements on default installs. more the opposite and that why it's not in fedora anymore. Apparently opensuse has a better/custom/other preloading system than fedora had (which was readahead) and that's causing the speed improvements that you noticed. If you want to do a "fair" comparison of the speed than you must run Firefox on fedora once first (than it gets cached) and than start measuring the speed when you open it again. i bet it will be about equal to opensuse. I did this test a while ago with readahead and if the readahead files have the right paths than you will notice speed improvements in all apps that are in the readahead list. Fedora currently has no (correct me if i'm wrong) preloading/readahead thing started with a default install so (nearly) nothing gets pumped into the memory to get speed improvements. They will get there once they are started. So fedora isn't fast or slow. it's just working without caching programs that improve your performance. Perhaps it's time for fedora to look how opensuse is doing this preloading and investigate if that can be used in Fedora 9 (or Fedora 10 if 9 is feature frozen). [1] http://en.opensuse.org/SUPER_standard_benchmark -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
