[support-gang] XO-1 vs Sugar 0.104 performance, and swap to NAND Flash
Tim Moody
tim at timmoody.com
Tue Apr 7 23:56:50 EDT 2015
Thanks for wrapping your arms around this.
And congratulations to those who made the curve head in the right direction.
-----Original Message-----
From: support-gang [mailto:support-gang-bounces at lists.laptop.org] On Behalf Of James Cameron
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 11:47 PM
To: support-gang at lists.laptop.org; devel at lists.laptop.org; sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
Subject: Re: [support-gang] XO-1 vs Sugar 0.104 performance, and swap to NAND Flash
Browse is one of the most heavily used activities when internet or local content is available.
Tests were run over many hours on several XO-1 laptops. The XO-1 is an old design which is slow enough to give useful statistics.
The results show a continued improvement to startup time over the recent versions of Sugar, and a very small advantage to using swap memory.
--
The first test was to reboot, wait for Sugar to start, then automatically start the Browse activity, and time how long it took to start. Then the results of hundreds of tests were averaged.
Browse-140 on 12.1.0 with Sugar 0.94 took 25 seconds.
Browse-149.4 on 13.2.1 with Sugar 0.98 took 23 seconds.
Browse-157 on 13.2.4 with Sugar 0.104 and no swap took 21 seconds.
Browse-157 on 13.2.4 with Sugar 0.104 and NAND swap took 20 seconds.
This shows continued improvement to Browse startup time, in the scenario where the libraries have to be loaded into memory.
(Reference: test #8, and #9)
--
Another test started and stopped the Browse activity 25 times without rebooting. Then the results were averaged.
Browse-140 on 12.1.0 with Sugar 0.94 took 14 seconds.
Browse-149.4 on 13.2.1 with Sugar 0.98 took 15 seconds.
Browse-157 on 13.2.4 with Sugar 0.104 and NAND swap took 13 seconds.
This shows some improvement to Browse startup time, in the scenario where the needed libraries are already loaded into memory.
(Reference: test #6)
--
The same test also started and stopped most of the other activities
25 times without rebooting. Then the results were averaged.
For Sugar 0.96 the average startup time was 15 seconds the first time, and 11 seconds each subsequent time.
For Sugar 0.98 the average startup time was 17 seconds the first time, and 13 seconds each subsequent time.
For Sugar 0.104 the average startup time was 14 seconds the first time, and 11 seconds each subsequent time.
Detailed results by activity below. The key for these tables is:
cold = startup time for first start after sugar restart.
warm = average of startup time for subsequence starts.
std = population standard deviation for warm starts.
ratio = a ratio comparing warm start to cold start times.
tests = number of warm start tests recorded.
For Sugar 0.96 the results by activity were:
bundle_id cold warm std ratio tests
com.garycmartin.Moon 10.595 10.643 0.531 1.005 24
com.jotaro.ImplodeActivity 6.691 6.486 0.045 0.969 24
org.laptop.AbiWordActivity 19.474 14.459 0.804 0.743 24
org.laptop.AcousticMeasure 11.984 7.761 0.045 0.648 24
org.laptop.Calculate 9.809 9.560 0.065 0.975 24
org.laptop.HelpActivity 19.487 11.342 0.688 0.582 24
org.laptop.MeasureActivity 12.478 10.246 0.085 0.821 24
org.laptop.Memorize 16.229 13.243 0.539 0.816 24
org.laptop.Oficina 10.421 9.490 0.431 0.911 24
org.laptop.Pippy 6.421 6.150 0.050 0.958 24
org.laptop.RecordActivity 12.563 11.179 0.346 0.890 24
org.laptop.TamTamMini 16.676 14.414 0.338 0.864 24
org.laptop.WebActivity 23.335 14.260 0.241 0.611 24
tv.alterna.Clock 8.782 8.631 0.067 0.983 24
vu.lux.olpc.Maze 11.699 8.731 0.269 0.746 24
vu.lux.olpc.Speak 15.187 11.460 0.261 0.755 24
For Sugar 0.98 the results by activity were:
bundle_id cold warm std ratio tests
com.garycmartin.Moon 12.946 11.039 0.372 0.853 24
com.jotaro.ImplodeActivity 11.494 11.352 0.499 0.988 24
org.laptop.AbiWordActivity 26.611 21.501 1.041 0.808 24
org.laptop.AcousticMeasure 14.865 12.949 0.351 0.871 24
org.laptop.Calculate 12.063 10.220 0.207 0.847 24
org.laptop.HelpActivity 18.378 11.101 0.311 0.604 24
org.laptop.MeasureActivity 19.566 13.791 0.308 0.705 24
org.laptop.Memorize 20.977 14.462 0.791 0.689 24
org.laptop.Oficina 14.216 13.948 0.246 0.981 24
org.laptop.Pippy 11.793 10.983 0.141 0.931 24
org.laptop.RecordActivity 18.459 13.165 0.514 0.713 24
org.laptop.sugar.Jukebox 16.346 11.466 0.292 0.701 24
org.laptop.sugar.ReadActivity 16.407 13.253 0.597 0.808 24
org.laptop.TamTamMini 20.218 16.475 0.638 0.815 24
org.laptop.WebActivity 22.427 14.587 0.329 0.650 24
tv.alterna.Clock 9.943 7.377 0.264 0.742 24
vu.lux.olpc.Maze 14.243 10.198 0.785 0.716 24
vu.lux.olpc.Speak 22.032 13.281 1.150 0.603 24
For Sugar 0.104 the results by activity were:
bundle_id cold warm std ratio tests
com.garycmartin.Moon 11.928 10.294 0.492 0.863 24
com.jotaro.ImplodeActivity 9.084 9.017 0.498 0.993 24
org.laptop.AbiWordActivity 20.868 16.862 0.376 0.808 24
org.laptop.AcousticMeasure 12.330 10.513 0.137 0.853 24
org.laptop.Calculate 11.591 9.920 0.120 0.856 24
org.laptop.HelpActivity 14.654 8.981 0.329 0.613 24
org.laptop.MeasureActivity 16.381 11.364 0.135 0.694 24
org.laptop.Memorize 17.961 14.550 0.183 0.810 24
org.laptop.Oficina 12.231 12.029 0.351 0.983 24
org.laptop.Pippy 8.752 8.202 0.128 0.937 24
org.laptop.RecordActivity 16.956 12.652 0.145 0.746 24
org.laptop.sugar.Jukebox 9.666 8.986 0.108 0.930 24
org.laptop.sugar.ReadActivity 11.296 10.477 0.165 0.928 24
org.laptop.TamTamMini 18.628 14.734 0.576 0.791 24
org.laptop.WebActivity 19.425 12.527 0.217 0.645 24
tv.alterna.Clock 10.061 7.124 0.123 0.708 24
vu.lux.olpc.Maze 8.366 8.265 0.120 0.988 24
vu.lux.olpc.Speak 24.555 12.075 0.208 0.492 24
(Reference: test #6)
--
The testing scripts can be made available if anybody else would like to replicate the results.
--
James Cameron
http://quozl.linux.org.au/
_______________________________________________
support-gang mailing list
support-gang at lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/support-gang
More information about the Devel
mailing list