Go Back   nV News Forums > Linux Support Forums > General Linux

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-12-05, 03:42 AM   #1
adamis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1
Default Who has faster multitasking OS/2 or Linux or Windows XP

Who has faster multitasking and multithreading OS/2 or linux
or Windows XP?
adamis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-05, 06:49 AM   #2
Daneel Olivaw
Northwood hugger
 
Daneel Olivaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 1,244
Default Re: Who has faster multitasking OS/2 or Linux or Windows XP

Windows XP, but not by much. I'm saying that because HT seems to have a better support on winXP. And its no big deal IMO. However, if you compile your own kernel, then Linux prabably comes out on top.
__________________
-Intel Core2 Duo 4300 (3.0GHz) | Asus P5N-E SLI | 6GB Corsair CVS PC2-5300 | GF8800GT 512MB | Western Digital 1TB Raid0 | Antec SLK2600AMB | Antec Earthwatts 500W
-Intel Pentium4 2.4C (3.4GHz) | Asus P4P800 Dlx | 2GB Crucial Rendition PC-3200 | GF6800LE 128MB | Seagate 200GB | Antec Overture II | Antec TruePower 2.0 480W


Mild agnosticism —the view that the existence or nonexistence of God or gods is currently unknown but is not necessarily unknowable, therefore one will withhold judgment until/if more evidence is available. A weak agnostic would say "I don't know, but maybe you do."
Daneel Olivaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-05, 05:17 PM   #3
9point9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 23
Default Re: Who has faster multitasking OS/2 or Linux or Windows XP

Doesn't that make it processor dependant? I'm running on Athlon XP so no HT.

You've left the Windows option as XP but I wouldn't be suprised if 2003 Server is better at it. Windows 2000 Pro will be just as good at multitasking as XP Pro seeing how they're underneath very similar. Win2K has less clutter though so will be faster.
9point9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-05, 02:18 PM   #4
rewt
mmm, Beer.. :drooling:
 
rewt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 3,667
Default Re: Who has faster multitasking OS/2 or Linux or Windows XP

Quote:
Originally Posted by 9point9
Win2K has less clutter though so will be faster.
The major drawback of Win2k however is the lack of security. No support for DEP, among other things, that the latest service packs provide for both XP and Server 2003
__________________
My pimp'n rig
Athlon64 Venice 3000+ @ 2.6GHz (4100+) · Win XP Pro x86, Vista Ultimate x64 · eVGA K8-NF41 nForce4 SLi · Corsair XMS 1.5GB PC3200 CAS2/1T · eVGA 2x 6600GT SLi · Leadtek Winfast TV2000 XP Deluxe · Western Digital Caviar SE ½TB RAID 0/1 · PowerLink LPK2-30 400W · LiteON LDW-411S OC to 811S 8x DVD±R/RW/ROM · MicroAdvantage 64MB QuickiDrive · Samsung SyncMaster 931B 19" LCD · Microsoft Optical Wheel Mouse USB · Sony PSXtoUSB Analog Gamepads · Memorex MX2700 Multimedia Keyboard · Lexmark 3200 Color Jetprinter · nForce Network Controller 1Gb/s LAN (Cable ~3Mb/s down) · ΩPioneer Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound
rewt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-05, 07:01 PM   #5
rflair
W OOO OOO
 
rflair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: T.O. Canada
Posts: 714
Default Re: Who has faster multitasking OS/2 or Linux or Windows XP

Thier was a report where the creator of linux talked about the way windows handled mutitasking and actually said there were advantages to the way windows does some of its multitasking chores. I tried googling for the reoprt but it hits nothing solid (lots of crap), it was actually a great read, talked about the way linux and windows are structured compared to each other.
rflair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-05, 12:55 PM   #6
Daneel Olivaw
Northwood hugger
 
Daneel Olivaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 1,244
Default Re: Who has faster multitasking OS/2 or Linux or Windows XP

Probably the way the wait/sleep queue is implemented.
__________________
-Intel Core2 Duo 4300 (3.0GHz) | Asus P5N-E SLI | 6GB Corsair CVS PC2-5300 | GF8800GT 512MB | Western Digital 1TB Raid0 | Antec SLK2600AMB | Antec Earthwatts 500W
-Intel Pentium4 2.4C (3.4GHz) | Asus P4P800 Dlx | 2GB Crucial Rendition PC-3200 | GF6800LE 128MB | Seagate 200GB | Antec Overture II | Antec TruePower 2.0 480W


Mild agnosticism —the view that the existence or nonexistence of God or gods is currently unknown but is not necessarily unknowable, therefore one will withhold judgment until/if more evidence is available. A weak agnostic would say "I don't know, but maybe you do."
Daneel Olivaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-05, 11:33 AM   #7
SuLinUX
 
SuLinUX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 847
Default Re: Who has faster multitasking OS/2 or Linux or Windows XP

By the way, Windows is not true multi-tasking since it doesn't use your memory/CPU correctly between apps. Linux splits CPU time between apps correctly and also memory is assigned much better and not wasted. Windows also uses the prefeching of apps to make it seem faster. The amiga did multi-tasking way before Windows just incase you though Windows did.
__________________
AthlonXP 2600+ / nForce2 Asus A7N8X-X / PNY GeForce FX5900 Ultra / 1024Mb Samsung Ram /nForce Sound / Hansol 920D Plus 19" monitor / Lite-On 32x12x40 / 2x Maxtor HD 40Gb/80Gb / nVidia 7174 driver / Gnome 2.10.1 / Kernel 2.6.11.9 / Slackware 10.0
SuLinUX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-05, 10:49 PM   #8
Daneel Olivaw
Northwood hugger
 
Daneel Olivaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 1,244
Default Re: Who has faster multitasking OS/2 or Linux or Windows XP

edit: -scratch one post- realized it made no sense after some thought...

I have no clue how the multitasking is implemented under WinXP, however, I have a fair idea of the theory for Linux since I study and program under Linux... but it just seems to me Linux is less responsive than WinXP, just a bit. But that could just be because my WinXP is pretty tweaked and not cluttered at all, whereas I never gave my FC3 installation as much attention.
__________________
-Intel Core2 Duo 4300 (3.0GHz) | Asus P5N-E SLI | 6GB Corsair CVS PC2-5300 | GF8800GT 512MB | Western Digital 1TB Raid0 | Antec SLK2600AMB | Antec Earthwatts 500W
-Intel Pentium4 2.4C (3.4GHz) | Asus P4P800 Dlx | 2GB Crucial Rendition PC-3200 | GF6800LE 128MB | Seagate 200GB | Antec Overture II | Antec TruePower 2.0 480W


Mild agnosticism —the view that the existence or nonexistence of God or gods is currently unknown but is not necessarily unknowable, therefore one will withhold judgment until/if more evidence is available. A weak agnostic would say "I don't know, but maybe you do."
Daneel Olivaw is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 03-22-05, 11:42 PM   #9
oldsk00l
 
oldsk00l's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,663
Default Re: Who has faster multitasking OS/2 or Linux or Windows XP

BSD beats em all, the kernel scheduler is noticeably better than in Linux. imho XP is probably the worst at "multitasking" out of the options here.
__________________
The Adama maneuver was incredible, go watch Exodus pt 2.
oldsk00l is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-05, 04:21 AM   #10
Leviathan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 11
Default Re: Who has faster multitasking OS/2 or Linux or Windows XP

I don't think you can nominate a definite winner there.
Don't know much anything about OS/2 or BSD, but the Windows Scheduler is geared more towards short response time than the Linux Scheduler (shorter timeslices) which also means there are more task-switches => more time wasted switching tasks.
Also, Windows has a mechanism to give UI-Threads higher priority so user interaction is again more responsive than on Linux (and propably most other OS) at the cost of raw processing power.
Besides, Windows has had working Kernel-Preemtion since Windows NT so all drivers for WinNT/Win2k/WinXP can be properly preempted.
Linux on the other hand has introduced Kernel-Preemtion only with v2.6 and there are still some drivers that don't work properly if they are preempted so it's adviced to not use that feature. (Quote: "Say Y here if you are feeling brave and building a kernel for a desktop, embedded or real-time system. Say N if you are unsure.")

Depending on Application, each system has its advantages.
Leviathan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-05, 09:56 AM   #11
oldsk00l
 
oldsk00l's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,663
Default Re: Who has faster multitasking OS/2 or Linux or Windows XP

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leviathan
I don't think you can nominate a definite winner there.
Don't know much anything about OS/2 or BSD, but the Windows Scheduler is geared more towards short response time than the Linux Scheduler (shorter timeslices) which also means there are more task-switches => more time wasted switching tasks.
Also, Windows has a mechanism to give UI-Threads higher priority so user interaction is again more responsive than on Linux (and propably most other OS) at the cost of raw processing power.
Besides, Windows has had working Kernel-Preemtion since Windows NT so all drivers for WinNT/Win2k/WinXP can be properly preempted.
Linux on the other hand has introduced Kernel-Preemtion only with v2.6 and there are still some drivers that don't work properly if they are preempted so it's adviced to not use that feature. (Quote: "Say Y here if you are feeling brave and building a kernel for a desktop, embedded or real-time system. Say N if you are unsure.")

Depending on Application, each system has its advantages.
Funny thing is though, is the short response time it seems no one really wants. I remember Linus Torvalds talking about it and it just hasn't been an issue people want improved.

About the BSD KSE, here's a good read.

http://www.freebsd.org/kse/
__________________
The Adama maneuver was incredible, go watch Exodus pt 2.
oldsk00l is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-05, 12:17 PM   #12
SuLinUX
 
SuLinUX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 847
Default Re: Who has faster multitasking OS/2 or Linux or Windows XP

Well Windows is designed to be a desktop OS from the out set and has advantages, Linux on the other hand was not.

I did a experiment in Linux and The GIMP 2.2.4, opened 4 of the same picture (around 80Mb with 10 layers) and applied a motion blur to one layer of each picture at the same time.

See picture below, which shows true multitasking, multithreading abilities of both Linux and The Gimp 2.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Multitasking.jpg
Views:	343
Size:	191.4 KB
ID:	11021  
__________________
AthlonXP 2600+ / nForce2 Asus A7N8X-X / PNY GeForce FX5900 Ultra / 1024Mb Samsung Ram /nForce Sound / Hansol 920D Plus 19" monitor / Lite-On 32x12x40 / 2x Maxtor HD 40Gb/80Gb / nVidia 7174 driver / Gnome 2.10.1 / Kernel 2.6.11.9 / Slackware 10.0
SuLinUX is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why Windows 8 could be the next Vista News Archived News Items 0 06-15-12 10:30 AM
Like XP or Vista: how will businesses treat Windows 8? News Archived News Items 0 06-06-12 09:10 AM
NVIDIA Brings 18 Years of Experience to Windows 8 News Archived News Items 0 06-03-12 06:20 AM
85Hz in Windows, but only 75hz in Linux? moazam NVIDIA Linux 1 10-04-02 04:39 AM
Linux VS. Windows XP! XP wins! dostler NVIDIA Linux 20 09-15-02 03:47 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2014, nV News.