What are your kernel compile times?

Well i used them on the Ryzen and it worked? I have little knowledge of bash shell. I just use what i know and what i can.

We all start somewhere, and nowadays Linux doesn’t need as much familiarity with the shell as you used to. At least this was a fun little dive into the shell for you :slight_smile:

Yes, I like learning new things. I tend to stick to more hardware. But i only know what i know and that’s pretty tiny in this realm!

I thought I’d try this too - but I thought it was supposed to be a slow process? Guess not these days

real	1m41.006s
user	20m50.037s
sys	2m8.172s

This is a Ryzen 7 3700x. Is it good? :grin:

The Ryzen’s are pretty darn good. I was hoping to get a 4700G but i see on the AMD site it’s OEM only.

Any modern processor will compile the kernel within a few minutes so long as you use all the threads you have available. AMDs will do better than Intel because they tend to have more cores. A more demanding test would be something like compiling the chromium source code which would take like an hour on a half decent machine, and a lot longer on an older one; but who wants to spend an hour plus on something done just for a bit of fun and no real benefit? :laughing:

real	3m28,307s
user	23m23,515s
sys	    2m17,948s

this is a 6700K 4 cores / 8 threads
16GB DDR4
SSD
on performance scheduling ( check this )

i have to create menuconfig , no old config present

Haven’t got a clue. Last time i went to the kitchen for coffee and the bathroom, and it was done when I came back.

Three minutes tops and that’s on an old processor.

Hmm i’m getting this:

$ time(make -j$(nproc))
zsh: number expected

I could probably pass the core number directly, but what would that be? this is a 6core/12thread cpu. So is nproc 6 or 12?

Nevermind, I simply ran bash and ran the test under bash instead of zsh

real	3m0,329s
user	30m40,902s
sys	2m53,927s

On an Intel i7-10710U

  1. Logical cores are counted as well.

Doesn’t there have to be a space between time and the parenthesis?

This is on my i5-9700k

real	3m34,096s
user	16m32,421s
sys	1m54,819s
real    6m9,419s
user    38m17,208s
sys     3m33,684s
$ inxi -Cx
CPU:       Topology: Quad Core model: Intel Core i7-4702MQ bits: 64 type: MT MCP arch: Haswell rev: 3 L2 cache: 6144 KiB 
           flags: avx avx2 lm nx pae sse sse2 sse3 sse4_1 sse4_2 ssse3 vmx bogomips: 35132 
           Speed: 2258 MHz min/max: 800/3200 MHz Core speeds (MHz): 1: 1487 2: 1214 3: 2168 4: 1621 5: 1644 6: 1184 7: 2072 
           8: 1772

nproc is a command itself that gives you the number of threads your CPU has. Running it by itself would give you 12, so the command without calling nproc would be time(make -j12).

I used time from the time package instead, only printing out real elapsed time. Also used the -s switch for the make command to suppress compilation output. (Note: built in tmpfs):

$ /usr/bin/time -f%E make -j24 -s
[...]
1:06.52

CPU: 12-Core AMD Ryzen 9 3900X (-MT MCP-) speed/min/max: 2195/2200/3800 MHz

Building with clang-11 is much slower:

$ /usr/bin/time -f%E make LLVM=1 -j24 -s     
1:23.36
CPU: Dual Core Intel Pentium G2020 (-MCP-) speed/min/max: 1597/1600/2900 MHz 
Kernel: 5.4.58-1-lts x86_64 Up: 9m Mem: 1344.4/3902.7 MiB (34.4%) 
Storage: 465.76 GiB (7.4% used) Procs: 124 Shell: Zsh 5.8 inxi: 3.1.06 

I don’t even want to start the compilation :laughing:

Just do it when you go to bed…:joy:

I ran this on three different machines …

Current Laptop (ASUS UX461UN): ~11m 42s

CPU: Intel i7-8550U (8) @ 4.000GHz
GPU: Intel UHD Graphics 620
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce MX150
Memory: 15866MiB
time make -j$(nproc) …
real 11m41.908s
user 82m28.841s
sys 8m12.556s

Old Laptop (Clevo P650RG): ~4m 44s

CPU: Intel i7-6700HQ (8) @ 3.500GHz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M
GPU: Intel HD Graphics 530
Memory: 64141MiB
time make -j$(nproc) …
real 4m44.188s
user 32m54.099s
sys 3m3.072s

Home File Server (DIY frankenputer): ~84m 2s

CPU: AMD C-60 APU (2) @ 1.000GHz
GPU: AMD ATI Radeon HD 6290
Memory: 7562MiB
time make -j$(nproc) …
real 84m2.196s
user 148m3.326s
sys 15m22.278s

So I expected the frankenputer to take forever, but I wasn’t expecting the old laptop to be faster (significantly faster) than my current one. To be honest, I haven’t done any tuning on the current laptop and I know I have some issues with how I have power management set up. There could be some serious throttling going on there … that’ll be a project for another day! :slight_smile:

Good to see you putting old hardware to use in that file server. Too often people chuck em out and buy something new.

It is interesting to see these super-slim laptops with i7 CPUs. I would guess that they could not properly cool it down and there has to be some serious throttling.
For example I was looking at some reviews of Lenovo Yoga X380 (my work computer) and it turned our that my version with i5 CPU is in every benchmark significantly faster compared to a version with i7. Every other component was the same. That is not something that could be patched after a release. But then again, maybe the designer didn’t anticipate that someone like me would run FEM analysis on it. :sweat_smile:

Two possible reasons:

The i7-s7xx is a higher-performing CPU than the i7-s5xx, and

The U-series are low-voltage units designed for power saving, HQ-series are relatively high-performing mobile parts.

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/compare.html?productIds=88967,122589

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i7-6700HQ-vs-Intel-i7-8550U/2586vs3064