Re:Windows 11 Pro: about 11% slower than Linux on Intel Core...
by rhn_mk1 on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @10:50AM
(#29014030)
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. If performance was strictly dependent on features, as you say, then we would be running an extremely stripped down OS.
But it's otherwise, and no one does it, even those who care about performance (removing excessive services notwithstanding).
Re:Windows 11 Pro: about 11% slower than Linux on Intel Core...
by runjake on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @11:22AM
(#29014506)
The point is people take trade-offs for performance vs. features. Features take up some measurable amount of performance.
It's a sliding scale, but everyone sits on that scale nonetheless.
Re:Windows 11 Pro: about 11% slower than Linux on Intel Core...
by jaywalk on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @12:16PM
(#29015316)
Absolutely correct. There's a reason that Linux servers (and even some versions of Windows servers now) don't run a GUI, for example.
Re:Windows 11 Pro: about 11% slower than Linux on Intel Core...
by rhn_mk1 on Thursday October 28, 2021 @12:38AM
(#29022435)
You got it in reverse then.
Re:Windows 11 Pro: about 11% slower than Linux on Intel Core...
by marcosdumay on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @12:36PM
(#29015616)
Last time I checked, performance was one of the benefits of the GNU environment over BusyBox.
Also, a lot of the features on the Linux kernel are there specifically to improve performance.
Otherwise, we’d all be running a stripped down Clear Linux kernel, BusyBox, and a few tool chains.