Path: news.mathworks.com!not-for-mail
From: "Suresh " <sureshn@aps.anl.gov>
Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.matlab
Subject: Re: 64-bit : Vista vs Linux
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:22:02 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Argonne National Laboratory
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <fuo28q$9in$1@fred.mathworks.com>
References: <fugcs9$3ni$1@fred.mathworks.com> <muylk34n32f.fsf@G99-Boettcher.llan.ll.mit.edu>
Reply-To: "Suresh " <sureshn@aps.anl.gov>
NNTP-Posting-Host: webapp-05-blr.mathworks.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: fred.mathworks.com 1208978522 9815 172.30.248.35 (23 Apr 2008 19:22:02 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@mathworks.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:22:02 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: MATLAB Central Newsreader 48216
Xref: news.mathworks.com comp.soft-sys.matlab:464839



Hi Peter,

I wanted to understand this better. I am thinking of rebuilding the vista 
hardware with Linux and do a direct comparison that way. I just want the best 
performance and matlab runs equally well on Linux too (we are not doing any 
simulink). I will post my test results later for people who are interested.

Thanks.

Suresh


Peter Boettcher <boettcher@ll.mit.edu> wrote in message 
<muylk34n32f.fsf@G99-Boettcher.llan.ll.mit.edu>...
> 
> [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