Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

Java Programming Operating Systems Software Windows Linux

Java Performance On Ubuntu Vs. Windows Vista 258

Posted by kdawson
from the steaming-cuppa dept.
Henckle writes "Phoronix did a comparison of the Java performance between Ubuntu and Windows Vista. They tested both Java and OpenJDK on Ubuntu 8.10 and Java on Windows Vista Premium SP1, all with stock configurations. To no-one's surprise, Ubuntu was faster in a majority of the tests. The two OSs were similar in ray-tracing, and Vista was faster at Java OpenGL due to shortcomings with the Linux graphics driver."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Java Performance On Ubuntu Vs. Windows Vista

Comments Filter:
  • Ray tracing in Java (Score:4, Interesting)

    by olddotter (638430) on Friday December 19, 2008 @12:04PM (#26173393) Homepage

    Have computers or JIT compilers gotten fast enough that people actually do ray tracing in Java?

  • Not surprising (Score:4, Interesting)

    by greg_barton (5551) <greg_barton@yahoo.TOKYOcom minus city> on Friday December 19, 2008 @12:08PM (#26173459) Homepage Journal

    I've been using scimark for years to evaluate system performance with java.

    Try it yourself. []

    Linux has outperformed windows (on average) for years, and OSX as well until recently. (java 1.4 performance on OSX was dismal)

  • by Yetihehe (971185) on Friday December 19, 2008 @12:10PM (#26173483)
    Yes. Sunflow [] is one example. I did my own tests, java vs c++ (almoste the same code) and java was only about 1.3 times slower.
  • Re:that's odd (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Dr.Merkwurdigeliebe (1055918) on Friday December 19, 2008 @12:19PM (#26173599) Homepage
    If MS put it in a VM, then it's an MS issue ...
  • by netsavior (627338) on Friday December 19, 2008 @12:30PM (#26173721)
    So javaQuake in an applet viewer is faster, try using ANY browser available for Ubuntu and load the applet in it... now use a naked IE activeX control (or even an IE window) to host the applet.

    Linux fails, because the overhead of running ubuntu gets COMBINED with the overhead of running FireFox of Epiphany or whatever, whereas windows overhead already includes IE.

    Pretty much the only thing "taxing" I use my laptop for is playing Runescape (browser hosted 3d rendered 100% java applet MMORPG) and with the same laptop dual-booting WinXP and Ubuntu, it is 100% flawless under windows in IE and almost unplayable in Ubuntu for any combination of browser and JDK that I have tried. I am almost to the point of writing my own browser applet container (the game requires a browser, 100% applet container doesn't work), it is just really annoying to switch to "windows the hog" just to play a simple video game that SHOULD be cross platform (and is as long as the linux system is higher spec than my laptop)
  • by BigGerman (541312) on Friday December 19, 2008 @12:32PM (#26173731)
    Now, if they tested webapps performance, say on Tomcat on both OSes, the results would be quite different. I would guess Vista would be faster for a single thread test but would not scale at all.
  • Re:Fairness (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Vellmont (569020) on Friday December 19, 2008 @12:49PM (#26173955) Homepage

    Sorry, that's just a stupid argument. Because an application is closed source they're never going to boost performance?

    No, because the OS is closed source you'll always be at the mercy of the license provider to boost performance. Honestly, how much does Microsoft _really_ care about Java performance? Not a hell of a lot.

    Besides which, benchmarks are for the here and now. OpenGL drivers may improve for Linux, Vista may improve its file handling, JavaVMs may see better optimisation, heck, even the damn benchmarks will probably get updated. None of this has anything to do with open or closed source.

    I guess I have to disagree here. None of those improvements happen in a vacuum. Microsoft decides whether to improve performance based on market decisions. The linux community makes decisions largely based on user needs. If someone really needed super-duper Java performance, they could go out and craft something that's soley performance based.

    The point here is that closed source performance improvements are granted to you by the software company (The Great And Powerfull Oz!). Open source performance improvements can come from the guy who actually wants the improvements.

  • Re:Fairness (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jellomizer (103300) on Friday December 19, 2008 @01:00PM (#26174101)

    By your argument Linux in theory should be light-years faster then Windows Mac OS or any other OS. However there are things that are slow in Linux. Why is Open GL so slow. Couln't you make MesaGL faster and more compatible with OpenGL.

    You may be at the mercy of Microsoft yes Microsoft may not care about Java vs. its own .NET platform. However if Microsoft could whip Linux in Java Performance they would love it. Fine Vista loss these benchmark but the excusing the one area it did win was in very poor taste.

  • Re:I was surprised (Score:5, Interesting)

    by LWATCDR (28044) on Friday December 19, 2008 @01:09PM (#26174191) Homepage Journal

    You shouldn't be.
    Most java development these days takes place on the server side. Linux is has a large precentage of the server market. Then you must know that Sun is a Unix company. They push Solaris and java on Solaris. Solaris is a lot more like Linux than Windows. The the final piece is that in the Windows server market Java shares space with .net.
    So as far as the amount of attention I would say that Solaris/Linux/Unix gets just as much attention as Windows does.

  • by Vellmont (569020) on Friday December 19, 2008 @01:17PM (#26174273) Homepage

    they used java 1.6.0_10 on linux and 1.6.0_07 on windows.

    Yah, and they also tested with the new openJDK 1.6.0_0, which had nearly identical results as Suns JVM. The differences between Windows and Linux are NOT subtle, and you normally don't get 3x performance increases with mature code. So I have a hard time believing that these major performance differences are really from going from 07 to 10, especially when you factor in the results from openJDK.

    I still think it'd be interesting to repeat the tests with the same JVM version on Vista and Ubuntu, but I'd hardly call the results "meaningless".

  • by shutdown -p now (807394) on Friday December 19, 2008 @01:20PM (#26174293) Journal

    Compared to plain C/C++ code (no non-standard compiler intrinsics etc), Java has been fast enough for a long time now. Think about it: it's all just math, and JIT (which may itself be slow - it doesn't matter!) generates pretty much the same native code as a C compiler would. g++ can still do some trickier optimizations, which may account for the odd 5-10% of difference; but hardly more than that. .NET can actually fare even better, because it supports raw unsafe code and data pointers with arithmetic, dynamic allocation of stack memory (alloca), and unions - this essentially covers all optimization tricks available in ANSI C.

Theory is gray, but the golden tree of life is green. -- Goethe