Path: news.mathworks.com!newsfeed-00.mathworks.com!nntp.TheWorld.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!llnews!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: Peter Boettcher <boettcher@ll.mit.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.matlab
Subject: Re: 64-bit : Vista vs Linux
References: <fugcs9$3ni$1@fred.mathworks.com>
Message-ID: <muylk34n32f.fsf@G99-Boettcher.llan.ll.mit.edu>
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/23.0.0 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xheCiJPEjfv+L0hvBouZ2KaDrjA=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Lines: 46
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 08:55:20 -0400
NNTP-Posting-Host: 155.34.163.114
X-Complaints-To: news@ll.mit.edu
X-Trace: llnews 1208954700 155.34.163.114 (Wed, 23 Apr 2008 08:45:00 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 08:45:00 EDT
Xref: news.mathworks.com comp.soft-sys.matlab:464753




[Please post your responses at the end, after trimming from the quoted
material]

"Suresh " <sureshn@aps.anl.gov> writes:

> "Yi Cao" <y.cao@cranfield.ac.uk> wrote in message
> <fulpra$k3f$1@fred.mathworks.com>...
>
>> "Suresh " <sureshn@aps.anl.gov> wrote in message <fulolp$982
>> $1@fred.mathworks.com>...
>> > 
>> > You are right about the memory being faster and that is a direct
>> > factor in what I am doing. But still I cannot explain a factor of 2
>> > in speed other than the fact the Linux OS handles resources much
>> > better than Windows.
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Vista Hardware:
>> > Dual-Core Intel? Xeon? Processor 5160 3.00 GHz 1333 MHz 
>> > FSB 4 MB L2 
>> > cache EX615AV 
>> > Dual-Core Intel? Xeon? Processor 5160 3.00 GHz 1333 MHz 
>> > FSB 4 MB L2 
>> > cache (2nd) EX616AV 
>> > HP 8GB (4x2GB) DDR2-667 ECC FBD RK355AV 
>> > HP 250GB SATA 3Gb/s NCQ 7200 (1st) EM060AV 
>> > 
>> > Linux Hardware:
>> > 2.33 GHz Intel Core Duo
>> > 8 GB DDR2-8 MHz RAM
>> > Hard disk same speed as well as capacity.

>> How about MATLAB bench results? Do you still get a factor 
>> of 2 performance difference?

> Actually the benchmark shows that the 2 machines should be
> very similar.

That indicates that your code is bottlenecked somewhere other than at
the CPU.  You'll have to keep searching if you want to understand this.
Try some disk benchmark software (iozone, fio, etc).  Even if the drives
are the same, there could still be a difference in filesystems, location
of the data on disk, caching/readahead algorithms at the OS level, etc.

-Peter