[arch-general] Benchmarks (GUI)

Manne Merak mannemerak at gmail.com
Mon Oct 11 08:36:32 EDT 2010

  On 10/11/2010 02:03 PM, Cédric Girard wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Jeff Cook<jeff at deserettechnology.com>wrote:
>> 2010/10/11 Cédric Girard<girard.cedric at gmail.com>:
>>> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Jeff Cook<jeff at deserettechnology.com
>>> wrote:
>>>> I usually just run gtkperf. I haven't tried PTS yet but it's hard for
>>>> me to trust anything that comes out of Phoronix.
>>> Please explain ?
>> Phoronix is just really unprofessional and unreliable as a media
>> outlet. They constantly post information that is first of all,
>> absolutely atrociously, sometimes incomprehensibly written, and
>> secondly often inaccurate and misrepresentative. They also use amateur
>> reporting practices and lack standards, as we see with their Steam
>> reporting and sending lots of traffic to Valve FTP servers not
>> intended for public usage (for one example).
>> Obviously this does not necessarily reflect directly on their
>> software, but I think it's wise to take anything from Phoronix with a
>> grain of salt.
>> From
>> Jeff
>>> --
>>> Cédric Girard
> Thanks for the clarification.

I have no opinion towards them, but just want to add that the their test 
suite mostly just run other tests (as x11perf or gtkperf) and report the 
results in a structured way.  So I do not think they have actually 
written any benchmarks (I think?)

On gtkperf, anything similar for Qt?


More information about the arch-general mailing list