Tiny Core Base > TCB Talk

2.0rc4 Memory Comparison - It's all good news

<< < (3/3)

bigpcman:

--- Quote from: jpeters on June 06, 2009, 03:01:15 PM ---I was interested in boot time (although the mentioned test might serve the purpose).   Crude comparisons with a stop watch would be sufficient.  Saving a few megs of ram isn't so interesting.  

--- End quote ---

Since I had some spare time I ran a few boot measurements. I used our sony laptop so I could boot directly from a usb stick. I averaged the results of each case over 5 restarts.

The laptop is a Sony NS140E t58 Core2 2Ghz. The USB stick is a super talent Pico Series USB drive that has a 28MB read transfer rate. I used the unetbootin-windows-344.exe program to create the usb stick boot system. I started the stop watch at the point I clicked on the linux install function in the boot menu. So the total computer boot time is longer since the bios boot time needs to be added.

Microcore - no tce directory present (base, nolocal norestore noswap) ... 14.2 second boot time

Microcore (norestore noswap tce=sdb1) ... 16 second boot time

Tinycore (base norestore noswap) ... 15.8 second boot time

These are not very interesting numbers since for most of us there will be more delays as a result of backup restore, establishing a swap file and loading extensions.

In the system I used there is of course a hard drive (sda1) present loaded with vista. So the boot up process will try and fail to access it first before going on to the sdb1 usb stick looking for the restore file, swap file and tce folder. So it's important to specify where all these files are in the boot options otherwise there will be significant delays. I avoided these delays by using options like base, norestore, nolocal and noswap.

jpeters:
Thanks for running that.  If I have it right, there's a savings of a few megs in ram due to the 4 extensions clinging to the HD, the tradeoff being a slight increase in boot time for the additional loops.  

edit: There's something I don't understand about the numbers. If I add back in free mem, cache, and buffers (- core), it looks like tc uses 4192kB less then mc/with core ext.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page