Fast clocks on slow hardware
Posted Jun 23, 2005 14:24 UTC (Thu) by utoddl
Parent article: What to merge for 2.6.13?
I'd like to get an idea of how much apparent difference the proposed timer changes would make to users on extremely old/slow machines. I used to run 2.2 and early 2.4 kernels on my kids' 200MHz 586, and they seemed pretty peppy (the kernels, not the kids). I just installed Fedora Core 4 on it (Hey, they wanted the games), and... it... is... -- heck, I can't type slow enough to express how slow it is. Slug races are more engaging. (I doubled the RAM last night on a lark; no difference. And I'm not talking about the GUI bloat in KDE and GNOME and the accompanying slugishness, I'm just talking about getting to runlevel 3.)
I know the new kernels do a lot of stuff, and on newer hardware with lots of resources to manage they are plenty fast enough. But the old boxes really make the cumulative effects of spent cycles stand out noticeably, even if those cycles are doing neat things. This hardware predates 1KHz clocks by eons. So, how much difference would you expect a 250kHz (or even slower) clock to make on a system like this?
When I get around to trying it out, I'll let you know what I find. In the mean time, what benchmarks would you suggest to help quantify these differences?
to post comments)