cross-posted from: https://kbin.social/m/linux/t/646160

With currently reviewing the HP Z6 G5 A workstation powered by the new 96-core AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX Zen 4 processor, one of the areas I was curious about was how well HP’s tuned Microsoft Windows 11 compares to that of Linux.

  • addie@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s a fair comment. But on the other hand, if you are spending a fortune on a CPU the size of your hand (look at that thing in the article!) then there’s a good chance you’re using it for business purposes, and either you or your IT department will be very keen to have a completely vender-supported stack. Enthusiasts with fresh OS installs will not be representative of users of this tech - AMD haven’t really been targetting it at gamer desktops.

    Of course, comparing both would be even better, see whether it is an HP crapware issue…

    • BirdyBoogleBop@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Don’t most businesses cut the bloat out and put their own builds on it? Sure they put their own software on that will hurt performance but it seems fresh vs fresh would be give better metrics.

    • CaptDust@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Totally agree, it’s two different tests and use cases. Most people will run it how it comes out of the box and that’s probably more representative of the real world.

      I just think it’s not entirely fair to say “windows is 20% slower” when we have no idea which trash HP loaded it up with. If I managed an IT Dept and learned my $$$$ hardware lost 1/5 of it’s performance I’d certainly be pushing HP for solutions. Or maybe they’d prefer to take 20% off the price?