this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2024
397 points (99.0% liked)

linuxmemes

21226 readers
137 users here now

Hint: :q!

Sister communities:

Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
    • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
    • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.

    • Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
    poopsmith@lemmy.world
    zephyr@lemmy.world
    rtxn@lemmy.world
    397
    Who doesn't like the running symbols in the terminal? (lemmy.world)
    submitted 7 months ago by Waffelson@lemmy.world to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world
    37 comments fedilink hide all child comments
     
    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [โ€“] ad_on_is@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    would you mind elaborating on the benefits? like what does one actually gain in a real-world scenario by having the software tuned to a specific machine?

    disk space aside, given the sheer amount of packages that come with a distro, are we talking about 30% less CPU and RAM usage (give or take), or is it more like squeezing out the last 5% of possible optimization?

    [โ€“] BCsven@lemmy.ca 4 points 7 months ago

    Closer to thr 5% . Between the intermediate code and final code writing there is an optimization stage. The compiler can reduce redundant code and adjust based on machine. i.e. my understanding is an old 4700 can have different instruction sets available than the latest intel.gen chip features. Rather than compile for generic x86 the optimization phase can tailor to the machine's hardware. The benefits are like car tuning, at some point you only get marginal gains. But if squeezing out every drop of performance and reducing bytes is your thing then the wasted compiling time may not been seen as waste.