Speed comparison, Windows VS Linux VS FreeBSD!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 окт 2024
- A #speedrun of #FreeBSD #Windows and #Linux
Just a bit of fun pitting 3 of the more famous Operating systems against each other!
Specs are as follows:
Intel Core i7 7700
16GB Ram ddr4 2666mhz
Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 3GB model
256GB SSD
Don't forget to check out my Discord server where you can talk open source operating systems and software
/ discord
#unix #opensource #garyhtech #freebsd #bsd
But FreeBSD should also be with GUI any desktop , xfce,mate, plasma or gnome to make it comparable.
Yes it should but for this it was just an out of the box comparison 😃
Linux red hat and suse have boxed versions, but I've never seen freebsd in a box. windows keys on a card over $100, and download it from their server.
so basically where's the box?
use arch linux then. it also has arch-installer if you are comparing it with bsds. lol so based
Using ghostbsd would have been a fair competition.
Indeed it would yes
Curious (1) what the timing would be if you installed a GUI and WM on FreeBSD, and (2) how an OpenBSD install would compare since it comes with X and window-managers on the install media (on an older machine I tested here, it was ~2min from boot to X login)
Please add time to install gui in FreeBSD
It is also worthy to note that Windows requires you to install your graphics drivers and other such drivers but GNU+Linux and FreeBSD comes with them preinstalled so that's a huge time save if you compare that too.
Thank you for the comparison!! But sometimes I feel like watching a 100 meter run and the one who wins took it in 9.8 seconds. The others arrived in 9.9, 10.0 etc... but not far beyond. I think it is best to focus on the "simplicity" of FreeBSD compared to other systems. FreeBSD (and other *BSD as well) continue the Unix approach - much more than many, many Linux distros does. "You get what you type". That is THE strength of *BSD! But on the other hand: All *BSD's are taking simplicity in installation and adjust it in installation and usage. Sorry, I can only speak for FreeBSD - but it works and works and works... Thanks for the many people providing *BSD and helping! I hope it will increase in popularity and acceptance. To be a part of the OS jungle :-) Simple, clean and stable!! Cheers, Norbert
This isn't really a speed comparison between operating systems. How long it takes to do an install depends on how much software it has to load, and how many things it has to do to get the system ready. This is, frankly, not relevant to a head-to-head speed comparison of different operating systems.
A better comparison would be to have all 4 operating systems run a standard benchmark suite.
It was never meant to be a serious comparison, it was a bit of fun
In my case, Gentoo booted a bit faster than FreeBSD. But that doesn't matter, does it? If I wanted a fast boot, I would do Gentoo/UEFI/systemd/ssd m.2 pci4.0 - these are the factors that affect the boot) But I preferred the most stable 7200 rpm SAS disks, FreeBSD and ZFS. Sometimes there were times when I wanted to show someone something in my Thinkpad and we were sitting like this ... well, well ... now it will load ... now it will load ... pfff ... oh yes, login . But this is an extremely rare situation. In the case of servers and workstations with their power and POST boot time) After all, we are FreeBSD people, we are not in a hurry, we wait several years for new hardware support sometimes, so waiting a few hours for the computer to boot is quite no problem )))
Indeed, FreeBSD of course can use uefi and m.2 nvme drives :)
I rather don't care which one can be install quickly , I rather care which one is the fastest while it runs when I use it every day.:)
Although there is a difference in booting speed, freebsd is British food and Windows is French food.
Not sure I follow, are you saying French food is better than British? 🤣
very god comparison. you could try ,mx linu ,and antix os;btw I notice ,that in all reviews there is no mention of installing a printer. Y ou asked ,why Win 11 took so long,here is a possibility,would win 11 have more lines of code compared to win 10 ,Linux ,and BSD?
Interesting. There are differences between Linux distros. Different package managers using different compression: xz (lzma2), zip (deflate), zstanard, ... and different package granularity. Some may have "package" while other has package, package-devel, package-doc. Finally distributions are more or less bloated. From what I use, Manjaro seem to have fast download/install times.
Openbsd is faster than this
hola GaryH !
uso pop os me parece saludable , buscaba videos sobre bsd y llegue hasta aca !
buen Video !
If PopOS didn't have the welcome screen it beat FreeBSD which didn't even have a GUI, damn impressive.
I've built loads of systems. I can't even count how many over the past 25+ years. I was really surprised at how close FreeBSD and POP! OS were!
I can see that booting the win7 virtual machine is very fast if using zfs pool (Seagate SAS/SATA 1Tb) + l2arc on SSD m.2 (Samsung Pro). Win7 installed with bhyve and zvol. The speed is as if it were an all-flash array. And you can always zfs rollback this zvol. Win7 has never been as stable as when using zfs.
Oh nice, might give that a try
There's GhostBSD which happens to be installable from a LiveUSB and it's pretty much FreeBSD with a GUI and also a graphical installer...
I really don't know if this is fair test. I guess a Debian text install vs freebsd would be more fair. Window would always loose to linux or Unix.
FreeBSD with no graphics is not on the same league....
So the Windows installs were just to pad the run time? ;) lol
Lol you saw right through me, in truth I just thought it would be a fun comparison :)
what will be the time if freebsd with gnome or kde desktop? ;-)
As a freebsd fan and current user. The amount of time it would take to configure a working DE is going to take you much more time. I love freebsd, but what you did can be done by any OS if all you desire is a working OS - but not - usable OS.
I would use GhostBSD instead of FreeBSD here as Pop OS reboots into fully installed and configured DE while FreeBSD into plain console only :)
great video as usual
Wow I didn't expect that, 3:20* vs 3:28?! Linux beat BSD by far since it didn't even use a GUI!
Well, these comparison also depends on the hardware. Some computers has a fast hardrive with SSD and some has not. So, such comparisons are always not really fair or accurate, simply because of the hardware.
@Dom Yes, in this video - but in the reality out there things might be different from machine to machine.
@Dom Yes, in THIS video - but do you really think that everyone in the world has the SAME machine? Come on!
do more pop os video
could it be the number of lines of code ;also you could try MXlinux os
hello would it be possible to show how to connect wifi on netbsd please
Can you show the boot time for all i mean after installation
when the log in screen comes up its installed
It might take a minute longer to install a desktop on FreeBSD, as a guess, but the big advantage is you get to install the desktop of your liking and not having one chosen for you.
this is a strawman argument, you can do this on any Linux, even pop
@@abanoub7002 obviously you totally missed the point but since your Linux system needed two months to catch up to the comments here it's understandable
You can do the same thing on Arch, Gentoo, and other distros.
Right now, FreeBSD doesn't have any GUI yet where Pop have it, which make sense why it took couple more time than FreeBSD (to extracting packages, different software instllation, configuration etc). However my point is that, Windows installation isn't slow, it's just huge than any other OS currently we've. It comes with .NET, C/C++ runtime, UI components, apps, embedded compatibility stuff and much more. Requires a lot of programs to configure (thru registry) and on each reboot it configure different internal programs. Windows just never follow "KISS" (Keep It Simple Stupid) principle, thus, it make sense why Windows took around 11 minutes compared to other OSes.
Same goes with Windows update, but that's true, having a lot of programs makes Windows slower, especially it happens on low end CPU, GPU and if we don't have SSD...
By the way, nice video comparison, but I'd expect to get GUI in FreeBSD, as TTY installer isn't too much huge, it have couple of packages and a DVD ISO image prolly will take about five minutes to install on a low end hardware, overall on a nice hardware mostly will end in two minutes.
This video contained its contents. The enjoyability of this video was enjoyable. I found the information herein to be informative.
I can install out of box dos for 10 seconds, does that mean dos is superior?
Yes
Lol. Linux and freebsd have more features them windowz Btw. Kvm, zfs, immutable systems, snapshots, support for ext 4 and ntfs, Selinux, docker. This things are better in linux/free bsd than in windows. Also linux/freebsd got lower ram and vram usage. You can run windowz games on Linux and for me gaming on Linux is better lol. Also windows stealing their ui from mac os and kde plasma. Also windows doesn't have cool and smooth animations like kde plasma
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍