- This topic has 20 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated Oct 17-10:13 pm by Brian Masinick.
-
Posts
-
calciumsodium
could you please expand more on your reasons to use liquorix and libre kernels vs. Debian/antiX kernels, in spite of showing worse results (as it appears to me) in your benchmarks? E.g. is this a matter of being more cutting edge, being more real-time responsive, etc…
I am curious if it makes a difference in average user experience, such as not playing time sensitive games or real-time critical applications…Hi @olsztyn,
On first inspection, the liquorix kernel loses to the antiX 5.10 kernel in terms of boot up time and ram, the reason why I chose to use the liquorix 5.19 kernel instead on the antiX 5.10 kernel on my newer computer is based on two reasons. The first reason was the following experiment: I used the latest chromium to watch a youtube John Wick 4 trailer video. I wanted to see how a modern browser functions using the different kernels. Using antiX 5.10.142 v2 kernel, the video played at 6 % CPU and CPU frequency of 3400. This is the maximum frequency of this CPU. Using the latest liquorix 5.19 kernel, the same video played at around 6 % CPU but the CPU frequency was 2700. So I am using less CPU power with the liquorix kernel. Second reason, it is extremely easy to install and update the liquorix kernel. One command in terminal. No need to set up repositories before hand.
Why did I decide to expand the use of the libre kernels on more of my computers? The most used computer in our household is the TV computer. My wife and kids use it all the time to watch videos and tv shows and movies. It is old. It is limited to 4 Gb of ram. But it has an HDMI output that connects directly to our TV. The video and sound output through this HDMI output is fantastic. I have newer computers with HDMI output, but their video and sound qualities do not match quality in this older computer. So the older computer stays. We use ethernet on that computer. Because the libre kernels use the least amount of ram, and work with ethernet, we use the libre kernel on that computer. Also, it is very easy to update the update the libre kernels. It is one command in terminal, if the repositories are set up ahead of time.
oops
…
Hi Calciumsodium:
First, thank you for tabulating my results…
Also, could you please expand more on your reasons to use liquorix and libre kernels vs. Debian/antiX kernels, …… For me, the main differences are here:
Preemption Model: CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY = Desktop … the default for PC CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE: = Server … less temperature and power Preemptible Kernel (Low-Latency Desktop) (PREEMPT) … more real-time responsive, better for the compilation, games, musics, but more power consumption Fully Preemptible Kernel (Real-Time) (PREEMPT_RT) … more real-time responsive but even more power consumption Timer frequency _hz 300 (100 server, 250 300 desktop, 1000hz pseudo-realtime) 300 ok for videos-games # jxself gnu libre x86-64_config (for desktop , lower power consumption and temperatures) CONFIG_PREEMPT_BUILD=y CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY=y # CONFIG_HZ_100 is not set CONFIG_HZ_250=y # CONFIG_HZ_300 is not set # CONFIG_HZ_1000 is not set CONFIG_HZ=250 # liquorix config-arch-64_liquorix_5.19 (better for the compilation, games, musics, but more power consumption) CONFIG_PREEMPT_BUILD=y CONFIG_PREEMPT=y # CONFIG_HZ_100 is not set # CONFIG_HZ_250 is not set # CONFIG_HZ_300 is not set CONFIG_HZ_1000=y CONFIG_HZ=1000 antiX config-5.10.142-antix.2-amd64-smp (compatible with olds GPU cards and all PCs) CONFIG_PREEMPT=y # CONFIG_HZ_100 is not set # CONFIG_HZ_250 is not set # CONFIG_HZ_300 is not set CONFIG_HZ_1000=y CONFIG_HZ=1000- This reply was modified 6 months, 3 weeks ago by oops.
olsztyn
Thank you calciumsodium and oops for details…
Greatly appreciated.Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
https://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters
Wallon
Dear CalciumSodium,
I also noticed the same thing as you, the CPU frequency is lower with Liquorix. But Liquorix can also have small speed spikes.
On the other hand, you also have to take into account the new functions that are integrated in the newer kernels.
As I’m experimenting with f2fs formatting on my partitions, I strongly advise to do the installations with a 5 series kernel. It doesn’t work well or at all with a 4 series kernel.
Anyone who wants to use exfat formatting to share data with other operating systems should also use a series 5 kernel.
There is also the better compatibility of the new kernels with newer PCs.
Have you also noticed that some i386 packages don’t install because of Liquorix for 64-bit antiX? At the moment it doesn’t bother me but I don’t know if it’s normal.
So it’s not easy to choose a kernel, but for general use the 5.10.142 kernel also has good performance and compatibility with recent hardware.
By the way, I’ve seen videos on Youtube that say it’s a disappointment for the 6 series kernel. Intel and AMD would not have given new code for recent hardware. Why give a new number if there is almost nothing new in this kernel?
Best regards,
Wallon
blur13
It’s tradition, I believe. Kernel versions never go higher than X.20, after that its X+1.
Brian Masinick
It’s tradition, I believe. Kernel versions never go higher than X.20, after that its X+1.
You’re on to something, but it may have been misinterpreted over the years:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14833467/maximum-values-of-major-and-minor-numbers-in-linux
In the link above, the major release number, a.k.a. Versions 4, 5, and 6, have 12 bits reserved to store the major release.
The minor release has 20 bits reserved; this was way back when version 2.6 was released in a 32 bit environment.--
Brian Masinick
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
