Hi all,
I'm just collating some results from a test run I did using a Monte Carlo code on two different computers, one was a 1.5GHz P4 running Windows 2000 and the other was a 2.0GHz P4 running RH8.
The Windows machine was faster than the RH machine. I ran the test again and got the same result. The difference was only 10%, but it was a surprise. Has anyone got any idea why there was so much of a difference?
The test case didn't use much memory and the version of the program was the same in both cases (apart from running on different OSs of course).
You have not really given enough information to explain the difference.
If this is anything but a troll then you would need to provide a lot more information for the question to be able to be answered but is probably rather off topic.
For a real comparison, it would be advisable to install the OS on the same hardware and then document what installation you preformed, the tests and the results and then opinions may be able to be offered after the hardware differences have been eliminated.
Also of note, for some things windows will preform "better" than other OS's (Linux only being one) - especially in an untuned environment. Some of the advantages of the unix type operating systems is the ability to cut back any un-necessary cruft to gain more CPU cycles, but these tend to require you to know how the OS works.
--
Steve.
-- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
