|
Windows 2003 server versus Suse Enterprise server
I came across an interesting article comparing Windows 2003 server and SUSE linux Enterprise server. No big surprises, unless you think Windows solutions are good networking options. You can read the whole thing on flexbeta
:: Quote :: As you can see from the graphs, Novell's SLES9 pretty much more than doubles the performance of Microsoft's Windows 2003 Server on the exact same hardware in both categories. This is very, very impressive, and shows the strengths of both Samba and the Linux kernel, as well as the attention to detail Novell/Suse employees had when implementing the default settings.No surprises, like I said, although page 5 also had this interesting factoid, which is something I've also noticed re Norton and system slow downs: :: Quote :: While implementing this benchmark, I found a few interesting facts about our network. First, if you run Norton Antivirus on your workstations, you are definitely taking a massive hit. On the NT 4 machines, the usual throughput until the server gets maxed out should be around 6Mbs, with Norton Antivirus enabled it dropped to just over 1Mbps. On the 2000/XP machines I was going to use, the hit was not as dramatic, but it still dropped from 5-6Mbs to just over 3Mbps.Anyway, I don't know how objective the site is, but it's not really surprising. Nice to see the test system used: :: Quote :: AMD Athlon XP 3000+ ( 400mhz FSB )
1 GB DDR Memory Gigabyte 7N400 Pro2 Motherboard (nforce 2) Adaptec 29160 SCSI Controller 40 GB Seagate Cheetah Hard Drive - 15,000rpm - latest version Gigbit Network Controller (on motherboard) Look familiar? See the hardware forums on this motherboard. The flexbeta forums are not that bad either, sort of on the real geek end of things, but hey, the world needs its geeks I guess. Back to top |
|||||
|
All times are GMT - 8 Hours
|
|||||