Benchmarking: Ubuntu 9.04 i386 vs LPIA on Eee PC 1000

May 6, 2009

==Background== The other week Ubuntu 9.04 Jaunty was officially released, to my great enjoyment! Of course, I’d already been running it for a while on my ASUS Eee PC 1000. The one issue I had with it was that the Ubuntu Netbook Remix Alpha that I downloaded was for i386, and the Eee runs an Intel Atom processor (it was compatible, but not the same). I had assumed that once 9.04 was officially released, they’d put out a LPIA (Low Power Intel Atom) optimized version of the aforementioned remix. I downloaded the Netbook Remix on release day, but didn’t notice until a few days later that the download was for i386. The image file name was “ubuntu-9.04-netbook-remix-i386.img”. I thought this was extremely odd since the UNR download page says ‘What do I need to install Ubuntu Netbook Remix?’ and then ‘An Intel Atom processor’. Very strange indeed. So I went and asked about it on the Ubuntu Forums. As it turns out I was not the only one that noticed this little “issue”. Later I also found a bug report for this problem and the reply from one of the mucky mucks of Ubuntu stated: i386 was a safer bet for the first release of UNR, also having an i386 and a lpia version double the QA time; however we will consider this idea for 9.10, there are some issues with lpia still. So…. No LPIA version for the first official release of UNR. Granted there was a UNR for 8.10, but it was sort of hacked together after the fact. I can accept that. After all Ubuntu doesn’t release for a ton of platforms like Debian does. But the question came up in the forum thread, is LPIA optimized code really necessary? Some claimed that LPIA gave them an hour more of battery time, other claimed it was crap. This, of course, hearkens back to the early days of x86 versus x64 operating systems. In fact I found an article about 32bit versus 64bit on 9.04 which I ended up using as a base for my own series of tests. ==The Tests== I installed Ubuntu 9.04 Alternate i386 and Ubuntu 9.04 Alternate LPIA on my Eee PC 1000, both with the most minimal installs. I then proceeded to run the following tests: Convert an Album of MP3’s into Ogg Vorbis Bunzip2 the Linux kernel tarball Untar the kernel Compile the Kernel Bzip2 a 400+mb ISO of Wikipeida ==Results== ===i386=== uname -a : Linux happyfeet 2.6.28-11-generic #42-Ubuntu SMP Fri Apr 17 01:57:59 UTC 2009 i686 GNU/Linux dir2ogg : 9mn 45s bunzip2 : 0mn 54s tar -xf : 1mn 51s make : 196m 18s bzip2 : 7m 6s ===LPIA=== uname -a : Linux happyfeet 2.6.28-11-lpia #42-Ubuntu SMP Fri Apr 17 01:56:10 UTC 2009 i686 GNU/Linux dir2ogg : 9mn 58s bunzip2 : 1mn 1s tar -xf : 1mn 28s make : 163mn 12s bzip2 : 7mn 16s ===Differences=== dir2ogg: LPIA was 3% Slower bunzip2: LPIA was 12% Slower tar -xf: LPIA was 21% Faster make: LPIA was 17% Faster bzip2: LPIA was 3% Slower ==Summary== The test was fairly inconclusive. With the exception of compiling the kernel (which took 30minutes less on LPIA), the difference in times between i386 and LPIA were statistically insignificant (for dir2ogg and bzip2). Frankly the tar -xf and bunzip2 tests took so little time that any minor flux on the machine (say a cron job) could easily skew the test in either direction. The kernel compile was, in my book, significantly faster. I think LPIA is worthy of a trial run on my Eee. Of course I noticed, as the bug stated, that there are a few issues. For example the wireless did not work out of the box like it did with the i386 Alpha I previously installed. This may be a quick & easy fix, but so far I haven’t had the time nor energy to actually fiddle with the machine. For those that are interested, after the jump I’ve got more details on exactly what commands I executed for the tests

ASUS Eee PC 1000, Ubuntu Jaunty and You!

February 25, 2009

If you follow my twitter feed, then you know over this past weekend I got an ASUS Eee PC 1000. In fact, I spend a good deal of time tweeting about it on Monday when it arrived. I thought I’d spend a little time sharing my impressions of the device and some of the tinkering that I’ve done with it over the last few days (it lasted about an hour before it got reformatted). Please note: Most of this post is in the extended body, so to read it all you need to click the more button. In the past I haven’t used this feature much, but this post is really long. First the system specifications: • 10.2" LCD @ 1024×600 • 1.6 Ghz Intel Atom • 1 GB RAM • 40 GB SSD (More correctly: 1x 8 GB and 1x 32 GB) • Comes pre-installed with Xandros Linux (of the Debian family) • 1.3 Megapixel Webcam • Stereo Microphones (shows as 1 device, used for noise canceling) • ~5 Hour battery • SD Card reader • 802.11b/g/n Wireless • 10/100/1000 Ethernet • Bluetooth • Multitouch trackpad • Ports: 3 USB, 1 VGA, 1 power, 1 microphone, 1 headphone, Network Hardware Review My first impressions is that this is a nice little package. My unit came in black and I think it looks good; granted it is a glossy surface so it picks up fingerprints. The accent pieces, like the buttons above the keyboard and the mouse buttons, have a brushed steel look (though they are probably plastic), which I think looks really classy. The screen is nice and bright at its brightest setting, though it doesn’t get that dark. The buttons on the mice are a little tough for my preference, but it isn’t really a deal breaker, especially since you can just tap the pad instead (which I have the tendency to tap really hard). Additionally, the important thing is, it is LIGHT, 3 pounds and change with the standard battery. They keyboard is advertised as 92% full size which I think is a fair description, though some compromises have been made in the name of fitting into the form factor. My only real problem with the keyboard is that directly below the Enter key is the Up arrow — right where I expect the Shift key to be. The Shift key has been moved to the right of the aforementioned Up arrow. Since I have a preference to use that right shift almost exclusively, I hit that Up arrow by mistake A LOT when I first started on the device. But like any keyboard that is slightly different, it takes a little getting use to, then it is all good. In fact, I am typing this entry up on the Eee PC itself and I’m not hitting the Up arrow by mistake nearly as often (and I find myself using the left shift some, which is actually a good thing for me to do). Overall, I’m pleased with how it is designed. Semi-update: I got to take a look at Brion’s Dell Mini 9, the shift key/arrow key setup is the same on his machine as it is on my Eee PC. So I’m under the impression that this is actually a fairly common design for netbooks. It makes sense, since most “regular” keyboards have the arrow keys off on their own little island and that wouldn’t fit in such a small form factor.