Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions

(Your Usenet client is really messing up linebreaks.  I don't know what you are using, but I haven't seen such problems since google groups postings.)
On 30/05/2024 20:20, Paul wrote:

On 5/30/2024 9:05 AM, David Brown wrote:

On 29/05/2024 23:08, bart wrote:

On 28/05/2024 16:34, David Brown wrote:

On 28/05/2024 13:41, Michael S wrote:

>

So what I see from this is that my new Linux PC took 14 seconds
while my old Linux PC took 25 seconds - it makes sense that the new
processor is something like to 80% faster than the old one for a
single-threaded calculation.  And Windows (noting that this is
Windows 7, not a recent version of Windows) doubles that time for
some reason.
 

 Did you turn off Windows Defender while benching ?
     [Picture]
      https://i.postimg.cc/QCgLJLHQ/windows11-AV-off-control.gif
 

I don't have that kind of stuff turned on - so no need to turn it off. The trick to keeping Windows malware-free is not to run malware on it.

Benching on Windows is an art, because of all the crap going
on under the hood.

Yes, it can be.  But I've done it before :-)  And there's less of that in Windows 7 than Windows 11.  (And for balance, there are plenty of background processes on typical Linux desktops too.)
None of my testing here was accurate benchmarking, it was just ballpark figures.  There was lots of other stuff running on all the machines, but with very low average cpu usage on a 4-core cpu, it doesn't make a big difference.

 I've had programs slowed to 1/8th normal speed to 1/20th normal
speed, by forgetting to turn off a series of things. Once all
that is done, now you're getting into the same ballpark as Linux.

Does that mean you are happy running normal programs at these speeds? If you have all this background stuff running when you are not benchmarking, but simply working on the computer, then surely it has a similar effect for your compiler, IDE, browser, and whatever else you are doing?  I know some people run multiple anti-virus and other "security" programs that slow down some tasks on Windows, but not /that/ much.

 I also have to turn off the crap salad in Windows, when Windows Update
is running!!!

Why would Windows Update be running?  In particular, why would it be running when you are using the machine for other purposes?

The OS is too stupid to optimize conditions for its
own activity. My laptop for example, ran out of RAM, because "SearchApp"
was eating a three-course meal while I was working. Attempting to kill
that mother, caused the incoming Update to install at closer to normal
speed.
 It takes practice to get good at benching modern Windows. On
an OS like Windows 2000, it was always ready to bench. It came
with no AV. It had no secret agenda. It just worked. Each succeeding
version is more of a nightmare.
 Imagine when the local AI is running on the machine, and the power
consumption is 200W while it "listens to your voice". At least they're
staying true to their design principles.
 

Imagine turning off (or never enabling) the services that you don't find useful and can be a significant drain.  I always disable Windows updates, indexing services, and would never have a "voice AI" on a computer.  Linux does not have anything like as much of this kind of nonsense on normal desktops (though I believe Ubuntu had some nasty automatic search systems for a while).  The only one I can think of is "updatedb" for the "locate" command.  While "locate" can sometimes be useful, trawling the filesystem can be very time-consuming if it is large.  But it's easy to tune updatedb to cover only the bits you need.