Guest horatiu_v Posted October 6, 2004 Report Share Posted October 6, 2004 Hi there I installed Mdk 10 on two machines. 1- AMD Athlon 1.20 GHz, 256 MB Ram 2- P4 centrino 1.4 GHz 768 MB Ram (256 + 512) Laptop IBM T40 Works well on both but on AMD it moves fater. The boot time is longer on IBM and also the log manager it takes more time to start. Can anyone have an idea why? I believed that on my IBM will fly but it moves slower :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamw Posted October 6, 2004 Report Share Posted October 6, 2004 It could well simply be down to hard disk speeds. Booting up in particular is very heavy on the hard disk and not so heavy on anything else; laptop hard disks are generally a *lot* slower than desktops which could account for the difference on its own. I would bet that if you were to try encoding some audio files, or editing some large image files, the laptop would outperform the desktop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arctic Posted October 6, 2004 Report Share Posted October 6, 2004 (edited) first of all: amd-processors are faster than intel-processors. lots of benchmarking tests have proven this to be true. second: laptops boot a significant amount slower than desktop pcs. my notebook (intelprocessor, 1.8 ghz) needs nearly twice the time too boot up into mandrake than my old 750 mhz amd processor dektop pc. both harddisks run with 7200 rpm. so... what shall we do? relax and make some coffee. :) Edited October 6, 2004 by arctic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illogic-al Posted October 6, 2004 Report Share Posted October 6, 2004 first of all: amd-processors are faster than intel-processors. lots of benchmarking tests have proven this to be true.second: laptops boot a significant amount slower than desktop pcs. my notebook (intelprocessor, 1.8 ghz) needs nearly twice the time too boot up into mandrake than my old 750 mhz amd processor dektop pc. both harddisks run with 7200 rpm. so... what shall we do? relax and make some coffee. :) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> If you're 1.4 gig p3 is faster than you 750 ghx amd that thing needs to be shot! But like adamw said laptop harddrives are usually much slower than deskotp counterparts, so that might have something to do with it. Another big factor is mdk searching for and loading a pmcia card modules and stuff so that it'll work. Takes time to find, takes time to load and takes more time to enable the network. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AussieJohn Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 Sorry illogic-al, But he said his AMD CPU is a 1.2Ghz , he did NOT say it was an AMD1200. Therefore it is easy to see why his desktop is much faster. I think, from memory, an AMD 1.2Ghz is around a 1600 or 1800. All the pre Bartons ran pretty hot so would not be as good for a laptop anyway. Cheers. John. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest horatiu_v Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 OK guys I understood, but at least do you think that I can make my Mdk to boot and moves faster than XP? On the same computer (IBM T40) I have XP and Mdk 10. XP boot faster than Mdk. Do you have some solutions for making my linux to run faster? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aRTee Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 quick comment on cpu speed: a centrino 1.4GHz beats the pants of an Athlon 1.2GHz. Do realise that P4 has a lower IPC (instructions per clock) performance than the PIII, and athlon has a higher IPC than a PIII. Centrino CPU's (banias core for a 1.4GHz one) also have higher IPC than a PIII, similar to the IPC of the last batches of 32bit athlons (and therefore in most cases higher than the IPC of the first athlons - thunderbird cores, such as the mentioned 1.2GHz athlon). So at the same clock speed, with all other things equal, the centrino cpu should be at least as fast as the athlon. At more than 15% higher clock speed, it should in no case be slower. But then: you don't have it on the same system. Different harddisk, but also: different ide/ata controller, different chipset, different network cards, different drivers, different services running, different checks, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest horatiu_v Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 OK I understood, but there are some ways to optimize Mdk to run faster? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ixthusdan Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 Yes, there are several articles here on the board about optimizing Mandrake on a lappy. I would search that forum for answers. I know that by default there are usually services that are running which are not needed by all users. So you can check your running services. But I am a little concerned about your performance. I have xp and three linux distros running on my machine. Without exception, the linux distros all run faster than xp. When I bumped my ram to 512MB, xp began to catch up with linux. In short, if you have lots of ram, the differences become small. Now, running programs, it becomes noticable again, particularly with games. If you are seeing the opposite, something might be fishy here. Oh, a final note about boot time. In the reading I have done, where boot sequence was actually timed, booting is very similar between linux and windows. What is different is that windows now presents a desktop screen before it is done booting. So, timing to the "desktop", windows wins. Now, try to launch a program! :lol: If you boot to a program launch ability, linux is usually faster. (windows is still making network connections when the desktop appears!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamw Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 izxthusdan: on a technical note, Mandrake does the same thing, though on a much smaller scale. The DM service, which starts the desktop, isn't in fact the last service to load during boot. Before I think 9.0 or 9.1 (don't remember which), the DE was only started after *everything* else; DE startup was made into a service and put higher in the boot order to improve apparent boot times, exactly the same tactic XP uses. To be honest, I've always found XP boots a little faster than MDK too. It's hard to tell since XP doesn't give you any feedback on what it's DOING while booting, but it does seem to have a more efficient init sequence than any Linux distro. This isn't terribly hard, as Linux init is rather antiquated and in need of an overhaul. There are a few projects aiming to "parallelize" bootup - allowing services to start at the same time as each other where this is possible without causing problems, instead of everything lloading in strict sequence and waiting for the previous thing to finish. It's rather a complicated task to manage, though, so it will be fairly tricky to roll into the distro. But I expect it'll happen within the next few revisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ixthusdan Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 That is indeed good to know. I had no idea that Mandrake was imitating the "monster"! :P I think that if you give windows enough ram, it actually works. And let's face it: windows is bogged down with all of its "reporting" that it does unbeknownst to the users! B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arctic Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 there are usually services that are running which are not needed by all users. So you can check your running services. you could e.g. disable the server-services in mcc. i guess you don't need them. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.