2544Re: [PrimeNumbers] Titanix speed
- Sep 5, 2001On 1 Sep 2001 09:19:24 -0700, Phil Carmody <fatphil@...>
>On Sat, 01 September 2001, Nathan Russell wrote:98 SE. I hear 2K is somewhat better, though.
>> Am I the only one who has noticed that Primo actually seems to run
>> faster under wine than under windows? It doesn't seem to make sense,
>> so I'm thinking it might just be my imagination, and having an
>> unregistered copy I can't easily benchmark it, but just thought I'd
>I once saw some SETI benchmarks, which showed a _huge_ difference between block times on identical hardware depending on which version of Windoze is used. (huge = tens of percents)I think a big part of the issue is that Linux programs don't need to
>I have noticed in the past that Proth and Primeform have both run faster under Wine than natively on NT (which I think was the fastest of the windozes in the seti tests I saw), but only by about 2%. My guess is that it's a combination of several things. Firstly memory management, and secondly task scheduling. Nowadays Linux is very efficient at both.
continiously use CPU time to listen for mouse clicks, etc.
Also, the way Linux handles memory is more efficient, as you mentioned
- specifically disc caching; one wonders how often primo needs to read
from its .dta files; my guess is not often, since I've successfully
defragged while it was running before.
- << Previous post in topic