# Terrible Linux performance, great Win32 [SOLVED? - see post]

## Suer7reus

I am having a terrible time with my Dell XPS (the first one) laptop.  It works wonderfully in WinXP, except for the OS, but the Gentoo I've installed on it has never run right.  I've set up my share of Gentoo boxes, and all are running smoothly except this.  They all compile faster too, even the 4xPIII Xeon 500 Dell server compiling single-threaded.  X is terribly sluggish, and my bashmark scores are all hefty negative percentages (vs a K7 1800+).  I've taken it to my local LUG, and they agreed unanimously that I have a serious performance problem, but made no progress in correcting it.  It takes over an hour to compile a kernel.

I suspect a kernel problem, I guess, but the problem is obvious on all of a) my 2.6.14-nitro2 (or the previous versions) fully preemptable, fully customized kernel, b) my tamer 2.6.14-gentoo-r* kernel, and c) my 2.6.12-gentoo kernel with absolutely nothing but filesystem drivers and IDE/block drivers, no preemption, all default options.  I believe bootstrapping from the LiveCD was slow as well (it's been a while), and I have even thrown in a Knoppix (2.6 kernel) CD and compiled and run bashmark with totally fresh toolchain/libs, to no avail.  My bashmark (integer) scores range from 200-1000 - they're consistent per the test conditions, but they change depending on whether or not I'm in X, in Knoppix, etc.

Here are my system specs:

P4 Prescott 3.4GHz, Hyperthreading

1Gb PC3200

256Mb Radeon 9800 AGP

For the record, I've tried:

Different kernels and configs, as described above

Every combination of {en|dis}abling HT is BIOS and kernel

Knoppix system

and I know DMA is turned on

What else can I possibly try?  Help me!  I really don't want to be stuck with this other dysfunctional OS all the time.

Thanks in advance!Last edited by Suer7reus on Sun Jan 15, 2006 6:26 am; edited 1 time in total

----------

## micmac

Can you post the ouput of 'emerge info'?

----------

## Suer7reus

Here goes:

 *Quote:*   

> Portage 2.1_pre1 (default-linux/x86/2005.1, gcc-3.3.6, glibc-2.3.6-r1, 2.6.14-nitro2 i686)
> 
> =================================================================
> 
> System uname: 2.6.14-nitro2 i686 Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.40GHz
> ...

 

Notes:

I have not compiled anything with march=prescott - I just switched it over from pentium4

I really don't think any of this has much bearing on the problem, as none of the packages on the Knoppix system I benchmarked on were compiled with these settings, or portage at all.  As I said, that benchmark gave the same terrible results I have always gotten in Linux.

Thanks!

----------

## sirdilznik

Holy USE flag overkill, Batman!!!!!!!!

----------

## Voltago

Perhaps you should turn off a USE flag or two... Also, look for Inspiron XPS entries in this list:

http://tuxmobil.org/dell.html

they might help you to configure your system.

----------

## hazza

Just a quick thought: is SpeedStep getting in the way? I have an XPS M140 and it seems to like running at 600MHz unless you ask it nicely   :Smile: 

Try the following:

```
# emerge cpufrequtils

# cpufreq-info

cpufrequtils 0.4: cpufreq-info (C) Dominik Brodowski 2004

Report errors and bugs to linux@brodo.de, please.

analyzing CPU 0:

  driver: centrino

  CPUs which need to switch frequency at the same time: 0

  hardware limits: 600 MHz - 1.70 GHz

  available frequency steps: 1.70 GHz, 1.40 GHz, 1.20 GHz, 1000 MHz, 800 MHz, 600 MHz

  available cpufreq governors: conservative, ondemand, powersave, userspace

  current policy: frequency should be within 600 MHz and 1.70 GHz.

                  The governor "ondemand" may decide which speed to use

                  within this range.

  current CPU frequency is 1.70 GHz (asserted by call to hardware).
```

Check the last line and see what speed your CPU is running at. There is an option in my XPS BIOS to nail the processor down at its lowest speed, also. While cpufrequtils utils seem to be able to override this, it can only do this assuming you have CPU throttling support in your kernel.

The Gentoo Power Management guide goes through this in great detail!

Cheers,

--Harry

----------

## hazza

Another thought: you can check CPU frequency without any tools by displaying the contents of /proc/cpuinfo:

```
# cat /proc/cpuinfo

processor       : 0

vendor_id       : GenuineIntel

cpu family      : 6

model           : 13

model name      : Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.70GHz

stepping        : 8

cpu MHz         : 1696.072

cache size      : 2048 KB

fdiv_bug        : no

hlt_bug         : no

f00f_bug        : no

coma_bug        : no

fpu             : yes

fpu_exception   : yes

cpuid level     : 2

wp              : yes

flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss tm pbe nx est tm2

bogomips        : 3396.55
```

cpu MHz line is the interesting bit!

Cheers,

--Harry

----------

## Suer7reus

Thank you very much for your replies!  I shall address them in order:

USE flags - although I have a lot turned on, most of them are local flags, and most of those affect packages I don't even have installed.  I have an even more USE-intensive system running on my server, which performs very, very well.  I use a lot of the packages the global flags are for, eg apache, mysql, pgsql, etc, but only rarely.  I use the machine as an ordinary laptop most of the time, but the kernel has modular support for lots of miscellaneous things so I can turn it into a router in a pinch, for example.  I don't run too many services at boot, and top'ping the system shows those I do use are unobtrusive.  In any case, the fact that my problem presists even outside the Gentoo system (i.e. the Knoppix I booted and benchmarked under) tells me that USE flags, while they may be a small factor, are not the principal one.

IXPS tuxmobil.org link - Thanks, but I have already done all of the things listed.  Gentoo's makes it mighty easy.

I'm fairly familiar with both CPU scaling interfaces - the old ACPI throttling as well as SpeedStep / cpufreq.  I am pretty sure that these are not at fault.  My CPU is listed in /proc/cpuinfo, cpufreq-info, and the /proc interface to cpufreq as running at full speed.  I can change governors and speeds and everything, but I have the system default to the performance governor (i.e. cranked all the way up).  I can read the ACPI state from /proc as 0% (throttled down by 0%, i.e. full speed), and I can change it for an extra burst of slowness if I'm so inclined.

Thanks a lot for your input and your time, but my issue remains unresolved.

----------

## falcon_za

I also suggest you try to go easy on the useflags. 

I think that you could go for -O2 instead of -O3. 3 is supposed to make stronger optimization than 2, but it also usualy results in larger files. On a laptop, which has limited hard drive performance, and possibly limited caches size and memory bandwidth, I think It might actualy result in slower performance. As for as the -funroll-loops, the situation might have changed without my knowing, but it used to be a broken flag, best avoided.

All that said, if other distro have proven sluggish too, it is likely unrelated to the way you configured your box, but if I were you, I'd still try to go with a slightly more conventional config.

----------

## hazza

 *Quote:*   

> ...as none of the packages on the Knoppix system I benchmarked on were compiled with these settings, or portage at all. As I said, that benchmark gave the same terrible results I have always gotten in Linux. 

 My next thought is that there is something moderately odd about your system, perhaps a new iteration of Intel's integrated controller hub or something that is just getting in the way. I'm sure you'll have checked this already, but any chance you can post (or post a link to) the output of dmesg after boot and also the output of lspci -v.

Cheers,

--Harry

----------

## Pse

What kind of hardware is there in your machine? (apart from your graphics card, CPU and memories?)

----------

## saber850

One significant performance problem I've had was caused by no DMA on the hard disk.

Aside from DMA, there's a slew of other params that affect your HD performance.

Use hdparm to check your config and tweak as necessary.

----------

## Suer7reus

Thank you all again for your replies!

Prepare yourselves for the mother of all posts, heh.

I shall address them in order again:

USE flags - not to be changed in pursuit of a solution to this problem as the problem presists even in non-Gentoo Linux systems (i.e. Knoppix).

CFLAGS - also should not affect the Knoppix system.  My laptop is designed to be a gaming platform and therefore has a 7200RPM UDMA5 disk drive as well as plenty of cache and memory bandwidth.  Therefore, I don't think -O* should make a big difference, and I'm certain it should not make the difference the below bashmark results demonstrate.  -funroll-loops works just fine on all my other boxes, and has for quite some time, and as such I am inclined to trust it.

Regarding the above, I have considered changing some flags, but intend to deal with the matter once this problem is resolved and the machine can [re]compile code fast enough to be worth my bother.

Obscure hardware - I actually have not checked my hardware out much at all - upon install it sounded simple enough and appeared to be well-supported in the kernel, but I can't help but think you're barking up the right tree now in light of my troubles.

Here's dmesg right after boot of my absolute bare-bones compiled-just-for-this-test 2.6.12 kernel:

```
Linux version 2.6.12-gentoo-r10 (root@cthulhu) (gcc version 3.3.6 (Gentoo 3.3.6, ssp-3.3.6-1.0, pie-8.7.8)) #3 Tue Jan 3 18:40:20 UTC 2006

BIOS-provided physical RAM map:

 BIOS-e820: 0000000000000000 - 000000000009f000 (usable)

 BIOS-e820: 000000000009f000 - 00000000000a0000 (reserved)

 BIOS-e820: 0000000000100000 - 000000003ffaa800 (usable)

 BIOS-e820: 000000003ffaa800 - 0000000040000000 (reserved)

 BIOS-e820: 00000000fec00000 - 00000000fec10000 (reserved)

 BIOS-e820: 00000000fecf0000 - 00000000fecf1000 (reserved)

 BIOS-e820: 00000000fed20000 - 00000000fed90000 (reserved)

 BIOS-e820: 00000000feda0000 - 00000000fee10000 (reserved)

 BIOS-e820: 00000000ffb00000 - 0000000100000000 (reserved)

Warning only 896MB will be used.

Use a HIGHMEM enabled kernel.

896MB LOWMEM available.

On node 0 totalpages: 229376

  DMA zone: 4096 pages, LIFO batch:1

  Normal zone: 225280 pages, LIFO batch:31

  HighMem zone: 0 pages, LIFO batch:1

DMI 2.3 present.

Allocating PCI resources starting at 40000000 (gap: 40000000:bec00000)

Built 1 zonelists

Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=Gentoo*Test ro root=302 udev nodevfs

Initializing CPU#0

PID hash table entries: 4096 (order: 12, 65536 bytes)

Detected 3392.806 MHz processor.

Using tsc for high-res timesource

Console: colour VGA+ 80x25

Dentry cache hash table entries: 131072 (order: 7, 524288 bytes)

Inode-cache hash table entries: 65536 (order: 6, 262144 bytes)

Memory: 907416k/917504k available (1107k kernel code, 9632k reserved, 288k data, 100k init, 0k highmem)

Checking if this processor honours the WP bit even in supervisor mode... Ok.

Calibrating delay loop... 6684.67 BogoMIPS (lpj=3342336)

Mount-cache hash table entries: 512

CPU: After generic identify, caps: bfebfbff 00000000 00000000 00000000 0000441d 00000000 00000000

CPU: After vendor identify, caps: bfebfbff 00000000 00000000 00000000 0000441d 00000000 00000000

monitor/mwait feature present.

using mwait in idle threads.

CPU: Trace cache: 12K uops, L1 D cache: 16K

CPU: L2 cache: 1024K

CPU: After all inits, caps: bfebfbff 00000000 00000000 00000080 0000441d 00000000 00000000

CPU: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.40GHz stepping 04

Enabling fast FPU save and restore... done.

Enabling unmasked SIMD FPU exception support... done.

Checking 'hlt' instruction... OK.

Linux NoNET1.0 for Linux 2.6

PCI: PCI BIOS revision 2.10 entry at 0xfcc7e, last bus=2

PCI: Using configuration type 1

PCI: Probing PCI hardware

PCI: Probing PCI hardware (bus 00)

PCI: Ignoring BAR0-3 of IDE controller 0000:00:1f.1

Boot video device is 0000:01:00.0

PCI: Transparent bridge - 0000:00:1e.0

PCI: Discovered primary peer bus 08 [IRQ]

PCI: Using IRQ router PIIX/ICH [8086/24d0] at 0000:00:1f.0

PCI: IRQ 0 for device 0000:00:1f.1 doesn't match PIRQ mask - try pci=usepirqmask

PCI: Found IRQ 11 for device 0000:00:1f.1

PCI: Sharing IRQ 11 with 0000:00:1d.2

PCI: Sharing IRQ 11 with 0000:02:00.0

serio: i8042 AUX port at 0x60,0x64 irq 12

serio: i8042 KBD port at 0x60,0x64 irq 1

mice: PS/2 mouse device common for all mice

io scheduler noop registered

io scheduler deadline registered

Uniform Multi-Platform E-IDE driver Revision: 7.00alpha2

ide: Assuming 33MHz system bus speed for PIO modes; override with idebus=xx

ICH5: IDE controller at PCI slot 0000:00:1f.1

PCI: Enabling device 0000:00:1f.1 (0005 -> 0007)

PCI: Found IRQ 11 for device 0000:00:1f.1

PCI: Sharing IRQ 11 with 0000:00:1d.2

PCI: Sharing IRQ 11 with 0000:02:00.0

ICH5: chipset revision 2

ICH5: not 100% native mode: will probe irqs later

    ide0: BM-DMA at 0xbfa0-0xbfa7, BIOS settings: hda:DMA, hdb:pio

    ide1: BM-DMA at 0xbfa8-0xbfaf, BIOS settings: hdc:DMA, hdd:pio

Probing IDE interface ide0...

input: AT Translated Set 2 keyboard on isa0060/serio0

hda: FUJITSU MHT2060AH, ATA DISK drive

ide0 at 0x1f0-0x1f7,0x3f6 on irq 14

Probing IDE interface ide1...

hdc: HL-DT-STCD-RW/DVD-ROM GCC-4243N, ATAPI CD/DVD-ROM drive

ide1 at 0x170-0x177,0x376 on irq 15

Probing IDE interface ide2...

Probing IDE interface ide3...

Probing IDE interface ide4...

Probing IDE interface ide5...

hda: max request size: 128KiB

hda: 117210240 sectors (60011 MB) w/8192KiB Cache, CHS=65535/16/63, UDMA(100)

hda: cache flushes supported

 hda: hda1 hda2 hda3 hda4 < hda5 hda6 >

ReiserFS: hda2: found reiserfs format "3.6" with standard journal

ReiserFS: hda2: using ordered data mode

ReiserFS: hda2: journal params: device hda2, size 8192, journal first block 18, max trans len 1024, max batch 900, max commit age 30, max trans age 30

ReiserFS: hda2: checking transaction log (hda2)

ReiserFS: hda2: Using r5 hash to sort names

VFS: Mounted root (reiserfs filesystem) readonly.

Freeing unused kernel memory: 100k freed
```

Here is some hot lspci -v action:

```
00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corporation 82865G/PE/P DRAM Controller/Host-Hub Interface (rev 02)

   Subsystem: Dell Unknown device 017c

   Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0

   Memory at f0000000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=128M]

   Capabilities: [e4] Vendor Specific Information

   Capabilities: [a0] AGP version 3.0

00:01.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82865G/PE/P PCI to AGP Controller (rev 02) (prog-if 00 [Normal decode])

   Flags: bus master, 66MHz, fast devsel, latency 32

   Bus: primary=00, secondary=01, subordinate=01, sec-latency=32

   I/O behind bridge: 0000c000-0000cfff

   Memory behind bridge: fc000000-fdffffff

   Prefetchable memory behind bridge: e0000000-efffffff

00:1d.0 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) USB UHCI Controller #1 (rev 02) (prog-if 00 [UHCI])

   Subsystem: Dell Unknown device 017c

   Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 0, IRQ 17

   I/O ports at bf80 [size=32]

00:1d.1 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) USB UHCI Controller #2 (rev 02) (prog-if 00 [UHCI])

   Subsystem: Dell Unknown device 017c

   Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 0, IRQ 16

   I/O ports at bf60 [size=32]

00:1d.2 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) USB UHCI Controller #3 (rev 02) (prog-if 00 [UHCI])

   Subsystem: Dell Unknown device 017c

   Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 0, IRQ 19

   I/O ports at bf40 [size=32]

00:1d.3 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) USB UHCI Controller #4 (rev 02) (prog-if 00 [UHCI])

   Subsystem: Dell Unknown device 017c

   Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 0, IRQ 17

   I/O ports at bf20 [size=32]

00:1d.7 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) USB2 EHCI Controller (rev 02) (prog-if 20 [EHCI])

   Subsystem: Dell Unknown device 017c

   Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 0, IRQ 20

   Memory at f8fffc00 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=1K]

   Capabilities: [50] Power Management version 2

   Capabilities: [58] Debug port

00:1e.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801 PCI Bridge (rev c2) (prog-if 00 [Normal decode])

   Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0

   Bus: primary=00, secondary=02, subordinate=02, sec-latency=32

   I/O behind bridge: 0000e000-0000efff

   Memory behind bridge: fa000000-fbffffff

   Prefetchable memory behind bridge: 50000000-52ffffff

00:1f.0 ISA bridge: Intel Corporation 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) LPC Interface Bridge (rev 02)

   Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 0

00:1f.1 IDE interface: Intel Corporation 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) IDE Controller (rev 02) (prog-if 8a [Master SecP PriP])

   Subsystem: Dell Unknown device 017c

   Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 0, IRQ 17

   I/O ports at <ignored>

   I/O ports at <ignored>

   I/O ports at <ignored>

   I/O ports at <ignored>

   I/O ports at bfa0 [size=16]

   Memory at 53000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=1K]

00:1f.5 Multimedia audio controller: Intel Corporation 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) AC'97 Audio Controller (rev 02)

   Subsystem: Dell Unknown device 017c

   Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 0, IRQ 18

   I/O ports at d800 [size=256]

   I/O ports at dc40 [size=64]

   Memory at f8fff800 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=512]

   Memory at f8fff400 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=256]

   Capabilities: [50] Power Management version 2

00:1f.6 Modem: Intel Corporation 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) AC'97 Modem Controller (rev 02) (prog-if 00 [Generic])

   Subsystem: Conexant Unknown device 5422

   Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 0, IRQ 18

   I/O ports at d400 [size=256]

   I/O ports at d080 [size=128]

   Capabilities: [50] Power Management version 2

01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc M18 JN [Radeon Mobility 9800] (prog-if 00 [VGA])

   Subsystem: Dell Unknown device 5106

   Flags: bus master, VGA palette snoop, 66MHz, medium devsel, latency 32, IRQ 11

   Memory at e0000000 (32-bit, prefetchable) [size=256M]

   I/O ports at c000 [size=256]

   Memory at fcff0000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K]

   Expansion ROM at fc000000 [disabled] [size=128K]

   Capabilities: [58] AGP version 3.0

   Capabilities: [50] Power Management version 2

02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Broadcom Corporation NetXtreme BCM5705M Gigabit Ethernet (rev 01)

   Subsystem: Dell Latitude D400

   Flags: bus master, 66MHz, medium devsel, latency 32, IRQ 19

   Memory at faff0000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K]

   Expansion ROM at 52000000 [disabled] [size=64K]

   Capabilities: [48] Power Management version 2

   Capabilities: [50] Vital Product Data

   Capabilities: [58] Message Signalled Interrupts: 64bit+ Queue=0/3 Enable-

02:01.0 CardBus bridge: Texas Instruments PCI4510 PC card Cardbus Controller (rev 02)

   Subsystem: Dell Unknown device 017c

   Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 168, IRQ 16

   Memory at fa000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K]

   Bus: primary=02, secondary=03, subordinate=06, sec-latency=176

   Memory window 0: 50000000-51fff000 (prefetchable)

   Memory window 1: 54000000-55fff000

   I/O window 0: 0000e000-0000e0ff

   I/O window 1: 0000e400-0000e4ff

   16-bit legacy interface ports at 0001

02:01.1 FireWire (IEEE 1394): Texas Instruments PCI4510 IEEE-1394 Controller (prog-if 10 [OHCI])

   Subsystem: Dell Unknown device 017c

   Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 32, IRQ 11

   Memory at fafef800 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=2K]

   Memory at fafe8000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16K]

   Capabilities: [44] Power Management version 2

02:03.0 Network controller: Broadcom Corporation BCM4309 802.11a/b/g (rev 03)

   Subsystem: Dell Truemobile 1450 MiniPCI

   Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 32, IRQ 18

   Memory at fafec000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=8K]
```

And here, for your reading pleasure, is the bashmark I ran immediately after that dmesg:

```
#######################################################

:  T   E   S   T        :    :S C O R E :  : R A T I O:

:-----------------------------------------------------:

:Cpu, Integer           :    :      1164:  :       +8%:

:Cpu, Floating point    :    :        14:  :      -98%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Memory r/w (cached)    :    :      1747:  :      +45%:

:Memory de-/alloc       :    :       259:  :      -60%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Multithreading         :    :       701:  :      -72%:

#######################################################

:           S  Y  S  T  E  M     I  N  F  O           :

-------------------------------------------------------

1x Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 3392.806MHz, L2 1024KB

Linux 2.6.12-gentoo-r10 

GCC 3.3.6 

112KB binary size

#######################################################

:      R E F E R E N C E   S Y S T E M   I N F O      :

-------------------------------------------------------

Reference system was Geno's pc with:

Athlon XP 1800+ 1575.631MHz, 256KB

Linux 2.6.11-ck1

GCC 3.4.3-20050110 (compiled with standard cflags)

glibc 2.3.4 (with nptl)

128KB binary size

Scores gathered on March, 30th. 2005 with bashmark 0.6
```

But what list of numbers would be complete without /proc/cpuinfo?  None, say I:

```
processor   : 0

vendor_id   : GenuineIntel

cpu family   : 15

model      : 3

model name   : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.40GHz

stepping   : 4

cpu MHz      : 3392.806

cache size   : 1024 KB

fdiv_bug   : no

hlt_bug      : no

f00f_bug   : no

coma_bug   : no

fpu      : yes

fpu_exception   : yes

cpuid level   : 5

wp      : yes

flags      : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe pni monitor ds_cpl cid xtpr

bogomips   : 6684.67
```

All of these except the lspci (taken from a kernel with a PCI device name database) were taken immediately after boot of my 2.6.12 bare-bones kernel.  I ^C'd init, so of course there was no X in the picture nor any other services / nonsense.

Hardware - the highlights from the above lspci include standard notebook chipsets with IEEE1394, USB, sound, bcm570x / tg3 gigabit netcard, and an ndiswrapper'd (when I use the other kernel) Broadcom/Dell MiniPCI wlan card.

DMA - I'm quite sure that DMA is turned on, and I'm pretty happy with the rest of my hdparm settings.  Furthermore, as bashmark ought to run entirely from cache I'm not overly concerned with disk performance.

Thank you once more for your time.  I am still very much puzzling over my issue, but have sort of run out of ideas.  If there are any other files you would like, please let me know and I shall post them ASAP.

----------

## hansmaa

I don't know if this might help, but have you tried passing the 'irqpoll' option to the kernel from the bootloader??

You might have some none-fatal irq conflicts that slows your system down...

----------

## MaGuS

Hi,

did you tried to turn off preemptable? On one box i got the same problem, after turning off preemptable the system is running much better!

Best regards,

Magnus

----------

## cyanide_nfs

well, i didnt mean to rub it in or anything, but your bashmark results seem kinda low...

heres my results with a a64 2800+ with 512mb ddr400 ram:

 *Quote:*   

> #######################################################
> 
> :  T   E   S   T        :    :S C O R E :  : R A T I O:
> 
> :-----------------------------------------------------:
> ...

 

----------

## Suer7reus

Thank you again!

irqpoll - I shall try this as soon as I return to the computer this afternoon - this is the kind of suggestion I was hoping for.  Thank you!

preemptable - I have tried both preemptable and non-preemptable kernels.  Neither performs correctly.  Good suggestion though; preemption seems like the kind of change that could so affect performance in certain circumstances, just not mine apparently.

bashmark - Agreed!  I wonder if my preposterously low floating point scores are at all indicative of the true cause of my problem.  What that cause might be, I don't know, I'm just thinking out loud.

Thanks again; update tonight!

----------

## hansmaa

Also try to add 'pci=usepirqmask' option to the kernel from the bootloader. Your dmesg complains about it.

Also, dmesg shows some unwillingness to lock on to what kind of cpu you have. (At least to me, being an AMD user)

Have you compiled your kernel for a different cpu than you are running it on??

----------

## linuxtuxhellsinki

I'll give you this from my ThinkPad, just for fun   :Laughing: 

```
hellsinki ~ # bashmark

#######################################################

:  T   E   S   T        :    :S C O R E :  : R A T I O:

:-----------------------------------------------------:

:Cpu, Integer           :    :       190:  :      -82%:

:Cpu, Floating point    :    :        14:  :      -98%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Memory r/w (cached)    :    :       162:  :      -87%:

:Memory de-/alloc       :    :        85:  :      -87%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Multithreading         :    :       252:  :      -90%:

#######################################################

:           S  Y  S  T  E  M     I  N  F  O           :

-------------------------------------------------------

1x Pentium II (Deschutes) 298.508MHz, L2 512KB

Linux 2.6.14-gentoo-r2-600

GCC 3.4.4

104KB binary size

#######################################################

:      R E F E R E N C E   S Y S T E M   I N F O      :

-------------------------------------------------------

Reference system was Geno's pc with:

Athlon XP 1800+ 1575.631MHz, 256KB

Linux 2.6.11-ck1

GCC 3.4.3-20050110 (compiled with standard cflags)

glibc 2.3.4 (with nptl)

128KB binary size

Scores gathered on March, 30th. 2005 with bashmark 0.6
```

----------

## GNUtoo

 *sirdilznik wrote:*   

> Holy USE flag overkill, Batman!!!!!!!!

 

lol

use="*" ??? (traduction: is he trying to use evrything...)

personaly i :

emerge -pv package

then i choose the flags

then nano /etc/make.conf

then emerge -pv (check)

then emerge

but what he does takes less (human) time

mabe the cpu is too hot?

----------

## Felixlein

Why is nearly everybody complaining about use-flags?

I dont think they have anything to do with the poor guys 

about-zero-floating-point-performance...

----------

## Felixlein

Hmm,I also have this bad fpu-performance,listening to bashmark;

didn't recognize it until now...

samuelcolt felixlein # bashmark

#######################################################

:  T   E   S   T        :    :S C O R E :  : R A T I O:

:-----------------------------------------------------:

:Cpu, Integer           :    :       914:  :      -15%:

:Cpu, Floating point    :    :        21:  :      -97%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Memory r/w (cached)    :    :       645:  :      -46%:

:Memory de-/alloc       :    :       233:  :      -64%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Multithreading         :    :       686:  :      -72%:

#######################################################

:           S  Y  S  T  E  M     I  N  F  O           :

-------------------------------------------------------

2x Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 3065.563MHz, L2 512KB

Linux 2.6.15-gentoo

GCC 4.1.0-beta20060106

88KB binary size

#######################################################

----------

## GNUtoo

is the cpu trotelling???

cat /proc/acpi/processor/CPU0/throttling

if it's not to 00 it's trotelling

check it when you do your benchhmark

mabe also try remplacing your root by a stage3 and run the test for showing that it's not the use flags (how this could be possible...it just make run the program heavyer...not the system so slow)

#######################################################

:  T   E   S   T        :    :S C O R E :  : R A T I O:

:-----------------------------------------------------:

:Cpu, Integer           :    :       420:  :      -61%:

:Cpu, Floating point    :    :        33:  :      -96%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Memory r/w (cached)    :    :       920:  :      -24%:

:Memory de-/alloc       :    :       118:  :      -82%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Multithreading         :    :       397:  :      -84%:

#######################################################

:           S  Y  S  T  E  M     I  N  F  O           :

-------------------------------------------------------

1x Pentium III (Coppermine) 697.946MHz, L2 256KB

Linux 2.6.14-gentoo-r2_dell_inspiron2500

GCC 3.3.5-20050130

100KB binary size

while running some kde,konqueror(a lot of instances),xconfig,firefox(a lot of tabs),xterm(a lot of instances)

try it under windows

what is the result?

----------

## cyanide_nfs

is it just me or are the pentiums really bad in the benchmarks ?

----------

## GNUtoo

it's said on the faq that the "intel processors" are bad at this benchmark

----------

## Vla

You definetly should activate Highmem support in your kernel or use one with 1 Gig low-mem support.

Maybe you want to poste your kernel conf?

Tried adding APIC to your config? Might be usefull to avoid all this IRQ11 sharing.

----------

## saber850

Here's one of my machines for reference:

```

nimble ~ # bashmark

#######################################################

:  T   E   S   T        :    :S C O R E :  : R A T I O:

:-----------------------------------------------------:

:Cpu, Integer           :    :       551:  :      -49%:

:Cpu, Floating point    :    :        63:  :      -92%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Memory r/w (cached)    :    :      1193:  :       -1%:

:Memory de-/alloc       :    :       236:  :      -64%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Multithreading         :    :       690:  :      -72%:

#######################################################

:           S  Y  S  T  E  M     I  N  F  O           :

-------------------------------------------------------

1x Pentium III (Coppermine) 1009.447MHz, L2 256KB

Linux 2.6.14.2

GCC 3.4.5

104KB binary size

#######################################################

```

Looks like my FP is really bad too; or the reference system is good.

So I'm just as interested in the solution.

----------

## Felixlein

Hmmmm,strange strange strange;made a few tests with my desktop-box and my laptop,

here the lappi(prescott,1Gb RAM,standard clock):

samuelcolt felixlein # bashmark 

####################################################### 

: T E S T : :S C O R E : : R A T I O: 

:-----------------------------------------------------: 

:Cpu, Integer : : 914: : -15%: 

:Cpu, Floating point : : 21: : -97%: 

: : : : : : 

:Memory r/w (cached) : : 645: : -46%: 

:Memory de-/alloc : : 233: : -64%: 

: : : : : : 

:Multithreading : : 686: : -72%: 

####################################################### 

: S Y S T E M I N F O : 

------------------------------------------------------- 

2x Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 3065.563MHz, L2 512KB 

Linux 2.6.15-gentoo 

GCC 4.1.0-beta20060106 

88KB binary size 

######################################################

 :Sad: 

(no throttling or scaling or speedstepping at all,sure as hell!)

Here the desktop (clawhammer,1Gb Ram, standard clock):

automat ~ # /etc/init.d/cpudyn stop

 * Stopping cpudynd ...                                                   [ ok ]

automat ~ # bashmark

#######################################################

:  T   E   S   T        :    :S C O R E :  : R A T I O:

:-----------------------------------------------------:

:Cpu, Integer           :    :      1571:  :      +46%:

:Cpu, Floating point    :    :      1461:  :      +92%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Memory r/w (cached)    :    :     12023:  :     +899%:

:Memory de-/alloc       :    :       779:  :      +19%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Multithreading         :    :      2562:  :       +3%:

#######################################################

:           S  Y  S  T  E  M     I  N  F  O           :

-------------------------------------------------------

1x AMD Athlon(tm) 64 3400+ 2210.784MHz, L2 1024KB

Linux 2.6.14-gentoo-r4

GCC 3.4.4

108KB binary size

#######################################################

:      R E F E R E N C E   S Y S T E M   I N F O      :

-------------------------------------------------------

Reference system was Geno's pc with:

Athlon XP 1800+ 1575.631MHz, 256KB

Linux 2.6.11-ck1

GCC 3.4.3-20050110 (compiled with standard cflags)

glibc 2.3.4 (with nptl)

128KB binary size

 :Wink: 

But real-life-performance of this two machines is almost equal!!!

did some serious untarring,emerging and movieencoding with this two

and none really sucked,the AMD is just a little faster,but more or less 

marginal...

USE-flags are exactly the same on both machines.

maybe a gcc-issue (at least in my case)???

will check on this (have a system-backup of my laptop with gcc 3.4.4)

but no time for this at the moment.

----------

## Suer7reus

Thank you all so much for your replies, and please forgive me for getting back to you so late!  I have unfortunately had some unrelated connectivity issues.

Anyway, my conclusion is that my problem is largely unrelated to my bashmark performance because I have decided that bashmark is a poor test of system speed (for whatever reason).  People's results (including my own in win32) make so little sense I can't help but conclude that there is not absolute relationship between poor bashmark performance and poor system performance.  I now intend to redo all my prior troubleshooting and test my steps with lots of actual system use instead of mainly bashmark.  My minimal testing kernel, for instance, was not capable of starting X due to a complete lack of driver support.  As for the kernel options you suggested I enable (Highmen, APIC, etc) they are enabled in my normal configuration, and I will ensure that they remain so as I reconfigure things for testing purposes.  I will also certainly take the suggested IRQ command line options into consideration.  Thank you all for your help!  I think this thread is closed now, given how much trougleshooting remains to be done (in light of the ineffectiveness of my previous testing).  I will post when/if I resolve my performance issue.

----------

## philc909

I'm having the exact same problem. The problems appeared after I emerged freenx and xorg-x11 so I initially posted the problem under Portage & Programming:

https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-423606.html

My laptop (problem system) pentium 4 at 2.4GHz gives me the following bashmark and as bad nbench scores (see other forum)

```

#######################################################

:  T   E   S   T        :    :S C O R E :  : R A T I O:

:-----------------------------------------------------:

:Cpu, Integer           :    :        86:  :      -92%:

:Cpu, Floating point    :    :         1:  :     -100%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Memory r/w (cached)    :    :       230:  :      -81%:

:Memory de-/alloc       :    :        28:  :      -96%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Multithreading         :    :        74:  :      -97%:

#######################################################

:           S  Y  S  T  E  M     I  N  F  O           :

-------------------------------------------------------

1x Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 2394.437MHz, L2 512KB

Linux 2.6.14-gentoo-r5

GCC 3.4.4

104KB binary size

```

My machine feels very slow. emerges take 5 to 10 times longer than before.

If you find anything please post it here. I've been on this for a week, cuz emerging xorg-x11 takes about 7 hours, so you think about it twice before calling emerge -e world, splat as my witness:

```

 * x11-base/xorg-x11-6.8.2-r6

        Emerged at: Thu Jan  5 10:15:47 2006

        Build time: 1 hour, 6 minutes, and 27 seconds

        Emerged at: Sat Jan 14 12:51:59 2006

        Build time: 7 hours, 7 minutes

```

----------

## revertex

 *new_to_non_X86 wrote:*   

>  *sirdilznik wrote:*   Holy USE flag overkill, Batman!!!!!!!! 
> 
> lol
> 
> use="*" ??? (traduction: is he trying to use evrything...)
> ...

 

There is no doubt, he's using almost all use flags in the earth, and some that i never had been eard before.

It's better use /etc/portage/package.use than /etc/make.conf, this way you can fine grain your settings, some local use flags aren't well managed by /etc/make.conf.

There is no doubt, USE flags galore will hog your system, it's better to filter for things that you don't want using "-flag" in your /etc/make.conf, use some global flags like kde, gnome cups, qt, gtk2, and put all the others in /etc/portage/package.use.

It will take a lot of time, but worth, listen my advise, i've learned it the hard way, doing a lot of mistakes.

One of the gentoo advantages is strip support for things that you do not want, using useflags galore will make gentoo as close as another distro that ship support for everything under the sun by default.

----------

## p.n

Suer7reus have you tried nbench for benchmarking?  Does it give you the same inconclusive results?

----------

## saber850

I find Open Benchmark Lab's CPU benchmark pretty good:

http://www.openbench.com/benchmark.html (scroll down for the download).

----------

## Suer7reus

I'm working on trying (and comparing) these two benchmarks as I type - thanks for your replies!  In case the USE crowd is still interested, I've converted my flags from make.conf to packages.use.  Now make.conf just has the use.desc flags I've selected and a few use.local.desc's that flagged several packages.  All hail grep.

----------

## HecHacker1

i'm curious.. what filesystems do you have? I had major breakage with reiser4 around that 2.6.12 nitro kernel. Everything worked fine, but it was super slow and disk access was horrible. I switched to ext3 until resier4 is cleaned up.

----------

## Suer7reus

Well, actually my problem has now been solved for good by Dell, who after four motherboard replacements finally decided it would be a good time to send me a replacement computer, an M170, with slightly better specs and much, much, much, MUCH better real performance.  It is shiny, and I love it.

As for filesystems, I have for a while now used reiserfs (3) on my root partition, NTFS for Windows, and shared an ext3 (mounted as ext2 in Windows with drivers available at http://ext2fsd.sf.net) partition between them loaded with home folders and games, creatively symlinked and mount --bind'ed.  That worked very well, especially for sharing settings between Windows and Linux apps (like Firefox, etc), but unless I need Windows pretty badly before the end of the week I am probably going to get rid of it!  I would like to try reiser4, but the new laptop has an Intel wireless card which is kind of a pain to deal with using nitro kernels, so I have since switched back to gentoo-sources and will wait on the reiser4 for a while at least.

----------

## saber850

My system (P3 1GHz; 1GB RDRAM) got a noticable speed boost by recompiling everything with GCC 4.  I don't recommend this unless you have some programming knowledge/experience since some packages don't build w/ GCC 4 yet (it's more strict than v 3.x).

I've narrowed down most of the performance bottlenecks to in X.  I suspect X is not expoiting the hardware acceleration of my video card (GeForce FX 5200; 128MB RAM) very well.  I recently found some documentation that suggests using nVidia's AGP driver as opposed to the kernel's (AGPGART) for certain chipsets (including mine: Intel 820).  I've reconfigured my system to try this and am awaiting a convenient time to reboot.

Regarding filesystems, I'm currently using ReiserFS 3 on 2 machines and ext3 on another.  I've come across posts that say ReiserFS 3 fragments and causes poorer performance (than ext3).  I plan to try JFS or XFS next.

----------

## Suer7reus

I am using GCC 4 on my new system - it works great for almost everything and gcc-config'ing back to 3.4.5 to fix (and it does) the occasional problem is easy.  My old system wouldn't ever build any GCC 4.x version, but retrospectively it was sort of a piece of shit.

I agree that X seems to be a big performance hog, having only really looked around with top and my Gnome system monitor, but I have on this system switched completely to Xgl (which in combination with my system's built-in LED's, actually - no joke - picks up chicks), with a secondary unmanaged Xorg server started by gdm for games and things that don't always play nicely with Xgl.  Xgl, in addition to being one of the sexiest things I can think of, runs very fast and very smoothly without even denting my performance numbers.  I can't advise you regarding AGP as nVidia card is PCIE =).  Good luck though!

I wish I could play with filesystems more than I do - my system configuration and partition layout are awfully resilient to trashing and playing with partitions, but until I go no-Win32 I won't really have much leeway due to compatibility and space concerns.  Plus filesystem changes take forever what with all the copying and moving of data from place to place, and until classes end at the end of the month, time is of the essence.

I've used Reiser 3 reflexively on a number of desktops, notebooks, and a couple of servers, and as far as I can tell it's worked great, but I don't think I'd notice anything wrong unless it was pretty drastic.

----------

## troinfo

Ok,

I tried this bashmark thing and here are my results:

```

#######################################################

:  T   E   S   T        :    :S C O R E :  : R A T I O:

:-----------------------------------------------------:

:Cpu, Integer           :    :       578:  :      -46%:

:Cpu, Floating point    :    :        19:  :      -97%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Memory r/w (cached)    :    :      2366:  :      +97%:

:Memory de-/alloc       :    :       236:  :      -64%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Multithreading         :    :       654:  :      -74%:

#######################################################

:           S  Y  S  T  E  M     I  N  F  O           :

-------------------------------------------------------

1x Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 2394.296MHz, L2 512KB

Linux 2.6.15-gentoo-r1

GCC 3.3.6

100KB binary size

#######################################################

:      R E F E R E N C E   S Y S T E M   I N F O      :

-------------------------------------------------------

Reference system was Geno's pc with:

Athlon XP 1800+ 1575.631MHz, 256KB

Linux 2.6.11-ck1

GCC 3.4.3-20050110 (compiled with standard cflags)

glibc 2.3.4 (with nptl)

128KB binary size

Scores gathered on March, 30th. 2005 with bashmark 0.6

```

Does this mean my system can run better then it is? If so any suggestion of what I need to look at?

Thanks,

troinfo

----------

## Suer7reus

No; we pretty much decided that bashmark is a very subjective test.  As long as your system seems to run well, your numbers are not unusually low relative to others posted in this thread - despite Geno's magical super-PC's indication otherwise.  Might be a good time to upgrade GCC though =).  (You may have to use gcc-config to select a newer compiler profile like 3.4.6).  Here are my new numbers, but bear in mind this is an entirely different system than the one this post covered:

#######################################################

:  T   E   S   T        :    :S C O R E :  : R A T I O:

:-----------------------------------------------------:

:Cpu, Integer           :    :      1693:  :      +58%:

:Cpu, Floating point    :    :        71:  :      -91%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Memory r/w (cached)    :    :       949:  :      -21%:

:Memory de-/alloc       :    :       680:  :       +4%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Multithreading         :    :      1910:  :      -23%:

#######################################################

:           S  Y  S  T  E  M     I  N  F  O           :

-------------------------------------------------------

1x Intel(R) Pentium(R) M 2133.000MHz, L2 2048KB

Linux 2.6.17-rc4-tycho-r1

GCC 4.1.1

72KB binary size

#######################################################

:      R E F E R E N C E   S Y S T E M   I N F O      :

-------------------------------------------------------

Reference system was Geno's pc with:

Athlon XP 1800+ 1575.631MHz, 256KB

Linux 2.6.11-ck1

GCC 3.4.3-20050110 (compiled with standard cflags)

glibc 2.3.4 (with nptl)

128KB binary size

Scores gathered on March, 30th. 2005 with bashmark 0.6

This system replaced the other, faulty one.  It flies.

----------

## kartebi

here is my mark

 *Quote:*   

> 
> 
> #######################################################
> 
> :  T   E   S   T        :    :S C O R E :  : R A T I O:
> ...

 

my make.conf (any suggestions welcome)

 *Quote:*   

> 
> 
> #
> 
> CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
> ...

 

my cpu info

 *Quote:*   

> 
> 
> processor       : 0
> 
> vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
> ...

 

----------

## Gentree

a few thoughts on filesystems.

be aware the reiserfs defrags badly with use and slows down a lot. No defrag so you need to cp or tar the whole lot elsewhere to clean it up. Neither is it that fast to start with. Even namesys dont develop/support it any more. I dont see point in using it now.

R4. I used nitro for a couple of years on various nitro kernels (on athlonXP). I now use "no-sources" but if you have probs with compat and just want R4, patch your gentoo-sources. It's a doddle.

I just did this on an elive installation (ubuntu-deb derivative) , got the patchs direct from namesys , untar, patch, make menuconfig and turned on the R4 module. I could not believe how well it went and how easy it was.

Slightly faster then ext3 , the main thing I like is atomic writes. Very resistant to power outs. 

ext3 for Win32 . Dont.

I regard this as very ill-advised unless you want to open a vector for windows crap to mess with your linux installation.

It is fine if you want to use ext3 on a windows only box and that's all.

The only way I would accept that on dual-boot is if you dont use ANY ext2/3 on linux.

I use vfat for any shared data partitions.

While on the subject , check if you have misc-binaires off in the kernel , I recently saw a post on Ubuntu (which has this on by default!) were a user had "acidentaly" run googleearth as root and it had spawned IE6... as root!

You are clearly a few orders of magnitude clever than that guy but you get the point about unnecessarily opening up vectors to bad/malicious wincrap.

 :Cool: 

----------

## suicidal_orange_II

Having read through this whole (thankfully short) thread just incase there was any performance gain to be had I decided to see how my pentium d system compared.  My bashmark came out at 

```
#######################################################

:  T   E   S   T        :    :S C O R E :  : R A T I O:

:-----------------------------------------------------:

:Cpu, Integer           :    :      1581:  :      +47%:

:Cpu, Floating point    :    :      1110:  :      +46%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Memory r/w (cached)    :    :      8386:  :     +597%:

:Memory de-/alloc       :    :       612:  :       -6%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Multithreading         :    :       743:  :      -70%:

#######################################################

:           S  Y  S  T  E  M     I  N  F  O           :

-------------------------------------------------------

2x Intel(R) Pentium(R) D 3520.161MHz, L2 1024KB

Linux 2.6.16-beyond4

GCC 3.4.6

100KB binary size

#######################################################

```

The result that worries me the most is multithreading, which seems very poor for mine as well as Felixlein and kartebi's 2x pentium systems.  Have we all set something up very wrong or is an athlon xp 1800+ really better at doing 2 things at once than a new p4 or pd?

Any thoughts appreciated   :Smile: 

----------

## optiluca

 *cyanide_nfs wrote:*   

> well, i didnt mean to rub it in or anything, but your bashmark results seem kinda low...
> 
> heres my results with a a64 2800+ with 512mb ddr400 ram:
> 
> ```
> ...

 

```
#######################################################

:  T   E   S   T        :    :S C O R E :  : R A T I O:

:-----------------------------------------------------:

:Cpu, Integer           :    :      1210:  :      +13%:

:Cpu, Floating point    :    :      1201:  :      +58%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Memory r/w (cached)    :    :      5696:  :     +373%:

:Memory de-/alloc       :    :       889:  :      +36%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Multithreading         :    :      2666:  :       +7%:

#######################################################

:           S  Y  S  T  E  M     I  N  F  O           :

-------------------------------------------------------

2x AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core 3800+ 2000.000MHz, L2 512KB

Linux 2.6.17-gentoo

GCC 4.1.1

112KB binary size

#######################################################

:      R E F E R E N C E   S Y S T E M   I N F O      :

-------------------------------------------------------

Reference system was Geno's pc with:

Athlon XP 1800+ 1575.631MHz, 256KB

Linux 2.6.11-ck1

GCC 3.4.3-20050110 (compiled with standard cflags)

glibc 2.3.4 (with nptl)

128KB binary size

Scores gathered on March, 30th. 2005 with bashmark 0.6
```

Isn't an Athlon 64 3800+ supposed to be better than a 2800+??????   :Confused: 

----------

## curmudgeon

 *saber850 wrote:*   

> I find Open Benchmark Lab's CPU benchmark pretty good:
> 
> http://www.openbench.com/benchmark.html (scroll down for the download).

 

That benchmark test didn't impress me much. My amd64 machine actually did worse on the 64 bit test program than the 32 bit test program.

```
$ ./oblcpu

openBench Labs CPU Benchmark (1GHz P3 -> LPI 100)

Running FFTR...time: 11.404, [9.038 -> LPI = 79.25]

Running LAHYDR...time: 5.162, [6.956 -> LPI = 134.76]

Running LABLE...time: 12.241, [13.219 -> LPI = 107.99]

Running LATRD1...time: 12.322, [8.246 -> LPI = 66.92]

Running LATRD2...time: 12.412, [8.161 -> LPI = 65.75]

Running LAPDE...time: 8.315, [8.243 -> LPI = 99.13]

Running LADIFF...time: 10.011, [8.185 -> LPI = 81.76]

Running LAFSUM...time: 23.507, [10.460 -> LPI = 44.50]

Running LA1DPP...time: 5.619, [5.067 -> LPI = 90.18]

Running LAFIMI...time: 17.011, [8.057 -> LPI = 47.36]

Running LAIMCO...time: 14.069, [9.014 -> LPI = 64.07]

Running LAMAPR...time: 6.025, [8.134 -> LPI = 135.00]

Running LINPAC...time: 10.212, [9.076 -> LPI = 88.88]

Running AIRREL...time: 8.516, [8.323 -> LPI = 97.74]

Running DWHET...time: 12.303, [11.273 -> LPI = 91.62]

Running DOUBLES...time: 9.028, [10.104 -> LPI = 111.92]

Running EGYPT...time: 9.243, [8.464 -> LPI = 91.58]

Running EGYPTD...time: 6.124, [9.032 -> LPI = 147.50]

Running GAUSS...time: 6.154, [8.143 -> LPI = 132.32]

Running HANOI...time: 12.472, [13.282 -> LPI = 106.49]

Running NEFF...time: 13.419, [11.010 -> LPI = 82.05]

Running PHILCO...time: 11.138, [10.416 -> LPI = 93.52]

Running PRIME...time: 14.323, [9.028 -> LPI = 63.03]

Running RR2...time: 10.048, [9.157 -> LPI = 91.13]

Running RR4...time: 8.082, [8.222 -> LPI = 101.73]

Running SINGLE...time: 8.082, [7.114 -> LPI = 88.02]

Running SWHET...time: 10.041, [9.705 -> LPI = 96.65]

Running ALAM18...time: 12.241, [8.512 -> LPI = 69.53]

Running GAMSIM...time: 9.041, [8.489 -> LPI = 93.90]

Running LUDD...time: 8.142, [8.236 -> LPI = 101.16]

Running LUSD...time: 7.697, [6.726 -> LPI = 87.38]

Total Elapsed Time:   317.34

Number of Kernels: 31

Arithmetic Mean: 92.03

Geometric Mean: 88.81

Confidence Lower: 83.63

Confidence Upper: 100.43

$ ./oblcpu64

openBench Labs CPU Benchmark (1GHz P3 -> LPI 100)

Running FFTR...time: 10.057, [9.038 -> LPI = 89.87]

Running LAHYDR...time: 5.209, [6.956 -> LPI = 133.55]

Running LABLE...time: 11.007, [13.219 -> LPI = 120.10]

Running LATRD1...time: 13.855, [8.246 -> LPI = 59.52]

Running LATRD2...time: 12.267, [8.161 -> LPI = 66.53]

Running LAPDE...time: 8.044, [8.243 -> LPI = 102.48]

Running LADIFF...time: 9.481, [8.185 -> LPI = 86.33]

Running LAFSUM...time: 19.359, [10.460 -> LPI = 54.03]

Running LA1DPP...time: 6.101, [5.067 -> LPI = 83.05]

Running LAFIMI...time: 16.202, [8.057 -> LPI = 49.73]

Running LAIMCO...time: 13.230, [9.014 -> LPI = 68.13]

Running LAMAPR...time: 6.050, [8.134 -> LPI = 134.45]

Running LINPAC...time: 10.001, [9.076 -> LPI = 90.75]

Running AIRREL...time: 6.101, [8.323 -> LPI = 136.41]

Running DWHET...time: 17.014, [11.273 -> LPI = 66.26]

Running DOUBLES...time: 9.448, [10.104 -> LPI = 106.94]

Running EGYPT...time: 7.680, [8.464 -> LPI = 110.20]

Running EGYPTD...time: 5.036, [9.032 -> LPI = 179.33]

Running GAUSS...time: 7.379, [8.143 -> LPI = 110.35]

Running HANOI...time: 13.425, [13.282 -> LPI = 98.94]

Running NEFF...time: 25.254, [11.010 -> LPI = 43.60]

Running PHILCO...time: 10.009, [10.416 -> LPI = 104.07]

Running PRIME...time: 13.395, [9.028 -> LPI = 67.40]

Running RR2...time: 9.678, [9.157 -> LPI = 94.62]

Running RR4...time: 8.247, [8.222 -> LPI = 99.70]

Running SINGLE...time: 8.420, [7.114 -> LPI = 84.49]

Running SWHET...time: 15.057, [9.705 -> LPI = 64.46]

Running ALAM18...time: 13.115, [8.512 -> LPI = 64.90]

Running GAMSIM...time: 11.483, [8.489 -> LPI = 73.92]

Running LUDD...time: 9.437, [8.236 -> LPI = 87.28]

Running LUSD...time: 8.244, [6.726 -> LPI = 81.59]

Total Elapsed Time:   331.09

Number of Kernels: 31

Arithmetic Mean: 90.74

Geometric Mean: 86.33

Confidence Lower: 80.47

Confidence Upper: 101.01
```

----------

## ripperd

For those that care, an AMD64 natively compiled and ran system:

With an idle system:

```
#######################################################

:  T   E   S   T        :    :S C O R E :  : R A T I O:

:-----------------------------------------------------:

:Cpu, Integer           :    :      2190:  :     +104%:

:Cpu, Floating point    :    :      2083:  :     +174%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Memory r/w (cached)    :    :     10535:  :     +776%:

:Memory de-/alloc       :    :      1674:  :     +156%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Multithreading         :    :      2590:  :       +4%:

#######################################################

:           S  Y  S  T  E  M     I  N  F  O           :

-------------------------------------------------------

2x AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core 4200+ 2500.254MHz, L2 512KB

Linux 2.6.17-gentoo-r7 

GCC 4.1.1 

84KB binary size

#######################################################

:      R E F E R E N C E   S Y S T E M   I N F O      :

-------------------------------------------------------

Reference system was Geno's pc with:

Athlon XP 1800+ 1575.631MHz, 256KB

Linux 2.6.11-ck1

GCC 3.4.3-20050110 (compiled with standard cflags)

glibc 2.3.4 (with nptl)

128KB binary size

Scores gathered on March, 30th. 2005 with bashmark 0.6

```

With GCC 4.1.1 recompiling in the background whilst browsing the forums:

*Note all scores drop except multitasking score jumps up!?!?

```

#######################################################

:  T   E   S   T        :    :S C O R E :  : R A T I O:

:-----------------------------------------------------:

:Cpu, Integer           :    :      1849:  :      +72%:

:Cpu, Floating point    :    :      1841:  :     +143%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Memory r/w (cached)    :    :      9924:  :     +725%:

:Memory de-/alloc       :    :      1371:  :     +110%:

:                       :    :          :  :          :

:Multithreading         :    :      4243:  :      +70%:

#######################################################

:           S  Y  S  T  E  M     I  N  F  O           :

-------------------------------------------------------

2x AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core 4200+ 2500.254MHz, L2 512KB

Linux 2.6.17-gentoo-r7 

GCC 4.1.1 

84KB binary size

#######################################################

:      R E F E R E N C E   S Y S T E M   I N F O      :

-------------------------------------------------------

Reference system was Geno's pc with:

Athlon XP 1800+ 1575.631MHz, 256KB

Linux 2.6.11-ck1

GCC 3.4.3-20050110 (compiled with standard cflags)

glibc 2.3.4 (with nptl)

128KB binary size

Scores gathered on March, 30th. 2005 with bashmark 0.6

```

----------

