Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267549AbUI1H4w (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 03:56:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267624AbUI1H4w (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 03:56:52 -0400 Received: from zeus.kernel.org ([204.152.189.113]:44014 "EHLO zeus.kernel.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267549AbUI1H4v (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 03:56:51 -0400 Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 08:55:45 +0100 From: Andrew Walrond To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [OT] Microsoft claim 267% better peak performance than linux? Message-ID: <20040928075545.GA3298@cenedra.walrond.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 954 Lines: 16 I was pointed to this (rotating) banner advert at the top of www.eweek.com It claims that when comparing Red Hat AS2.1 with Windows Server 2003 on a dual processor machine, Windows Server 2003 gives 276% better peak performance, quoting Veritest as the source. I think the report in question must be this one http://download.microsoft.com/download/0/7/1/0715a190-70f5-4b0d-8ced-f9d1e046aa6a/netbench.pdf Its dated April 2003, so this was probably discussed a long time ago, but can anyone point me in the direction of an analysis/rebuttal of this report from the linux community? "Windows webserver gives 3x performance of linux" is something I need to be able to debunk, assuming it's inaccurate. Andrew - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/