Re: Interesting ubench scores for FreeBSD 4.11, 5.4, 6.0beta3 and DFly-Preview

[Kris Kennaway <kkenn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2005-09-02, Toma¾ Bor¹tnar <tomaz.borstnar@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I took some time to play with a machine and test ubench scores on it for few OS. Machine is AMD64/939 3000+ with 2GB RAM 
> (dual-channel).
>
> I took ubench, because it does not deal with systems other than CPU and memory which usually says something about 
> efficiency of OS. I tried to optimize things by alwyas using flag "-O" and removing all debug stuff from kernels. Since 
> this was all done on the same machine I think we can kinda compare those results. I used FreeBSD 4.11, FreeBSD 5.4/i386, 
>   FreeBSD 6beta3/i386 and FreeBSD 6beta3/amd64 in this test.
>
> Summary
> Latest DFly-preview has best Ubench AVG of 106030, because of 2nd best memory score (124353) and balanced CPU score 
> (87707). Also good was FreeBSD 6beta3/amd64 with Ubench AVG of   101448, because of balanced CPU (102455) and memory 
> score (100441). Seems like extra registers in long mode help quite a bit. Third was FreeBSD 5.4/i386 with Ubench AVG of 
>     94304 - mostly because of best memory score (130602) and not so good CPU score (58006). Hardly behind was FreeBSD 4.11
> with Ubench AVG of 94296 - decent, but slower CPU score (84431) and very nice memory score (104161). FreeBSD 6beta3/i386
> was severly behind all of them with Ubench AVG of 55968 - with cpu of 59138 and memory of 52799.
>
> I wish DFly had better CPU score :) But it still has best score among 32bit OS systems!
>
> As usual, YMMV :)

Did you remember to disable the debugging features in FreeBSD 6
(WITNESS, INVARIANTS, malloc debugging)?  If not, you're incurring a
significant (usually >30%) performance penalty, which is consistent
with your numbers.

Kris