[RC5] Performance difference Win2k/Win98/ME

Matt Armstrong matt at lickey.com
Thu Oct 11 14:16:16 EDT 2001


My Win2k system is just 1% slower than my Linux system with RC5.  Both
running on identical Dell machines, both 1GHz.

I think Win98/ME may smoke both Win2k and Linux.


On Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 10:42:24AM -0700, Gerald Richter wrote:
> Yes. Win2k (and XP) steal cycles for the system kernel, and due to poor 
> coding the count is fairly high.. Optimal performance on nearly any 
> hardware is in linux, which puts windows to shame.. Just for the record 
> though, dnetc on my PII400 and Celery366 chips performs better under 
> win2k then under 98se... I refuse to give ME the honor of touching one 
> of my computers.. And I haven't had the money to spare for a modern AMD 
> system yet...
> 
> -Gerald
> 
> TD - Sales International Holland B.V. wrote:
> 
> >Hey there,
> >
> >I have no idea what the hell Win2K is upto but it sure sucks! :-)
> >I ran on the same machine Win98/ME they both score around 3,5 mkeys/s on 
> >Athlon 1GHz, if I install Win2K on the same machine doing nothing within 
> >windows this machine will only crunch a lousy 2.6mkeys/s whilst task 
> >manager says that there are NO other processes using CPU time. dnetc has 
> >99%. Is this a client issue or is Win2K secretly stealing CPU cycles which 
> >can't be seen in the task manager?
> >
> >Can anyone explain this?
> >
> >Regards
> >--
> >To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
> >rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
> rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest
> --
> To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
> rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest

-- 
matt
--
To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest



More information about the rc5 mailing list