Why Garuda is better in real world performance but not in benchmark

I have both garuda and manjaro installed in my laptop when I compair them in real world performance like rendering time, game fps etc garuda wins but when I benchmark them in cinebench manjaro wins

Cinebench is synthetic benchmarks, and test the performance over a given period of time.

I prefer geekbench over cinebench, because it is mostly real world task based.

Also, benchmarks depends a lot on external factors, like if charger is plugged in, is battery saver mode on etc. Here's mine laptop's geekbench scores, btw.


1 Like

I think this this guy is also having same issue as me
He used geekbench

I actually watched this; I couldn't help but wonder at lack of info provided. Which editions of each respective distro were tested? Were they both using the same kernels etc. At the end of the day use which ever distro feels right for you.

Benchmarks are great to test with but in all honesty real world usage means far more.

1 Like

Ohh, that's another major factor : Desktop environment

I used Cinnamon edition on Garuda Linux while performing these benchmarks, and xfce on mj.

Also, btw, I really don't think that a difference that is under around 5% is significant. Because at the end of the day, you won't feel that there is any difference at all.

But if difference is significant, Like 10% or above, then it should be a thing to really worry about.


This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.