With a lot of choices comes a great deal of curiosity. I’m looking at the choices and wondering what the real “seat of your pants” improvements could be between the different versions such as Bore, Deckify, EEVDF, Hardened, Ito and RT-Bore? Also, my rig has a AMD 7950X CPU and a 7900XTX GPU, so would I find “real” benefits to using the “extra/linux-zen” kernel or not? I don’t mean the mumbo jumbo that you get from some technical paper, but in plain English layman terms, how our systems can benefit or not.
I’m not unhappy with the kernel I’m using, but always curious about possible improvements, and what risks they might cost. Thanks to anyone taking the time to chime in.
Bore = Is using the CachyOS Bore scheduler, it’s feels more snappy than the standard scheduler
Deckify = The kernel for handheld devices like Steamdeck, ROG Ally, Legion Go, etc.
EEVDF = is using the standard scheduler
Hardened = is using a patchset to close some potential security holes, but this comes with a loss of performance
LTO = Link Time Optimized. Binaries are smaller and often a tiny bit faster
RT = Real TIme. This is a low latency kernel for stuff like audioworkstations to reduce jitter as much as possible
RC = Release Candidate. This is the unstable next kernel.
LTS = Long Term Support. This kernel gets support for years and usually is used by distibutions like Debian or Ubuntu. It is usually the last kernel of the year
Zen = one of the gaming kernels. IMHO the CachyOS kernels are better. I have it installed because it is behind the actual stable kernel, but not as old as the LTS. (In case there is a problem with the stable kernel).
Arch = Thats the standard Arch Linux Kernel without the CachyOS optimisations.
Thanks so much for the breakdown. The one thing I’m still confused about is EEVDF. I’ve seen a few vids acting like this is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but if it’s just a standard scheduler, what’s so great about it?
Because until EEVDF came along it was CFS (“Completely Fair Scheduler”) that had been around since 2007 .. but it was replaced beginning in the 6.6 kernel.
So it was an improvement. But its also now the standard in modern linux.
And, at least by certain metrics/use-cases, it is beaten by the more novel BORE.
I’ve recently been MOST interested in the Bore version, but not sure the differences between them? Which one do you think is best for overall features, speed and stability?
-Cachos-znver4/linux-linux-cachyos-bore
-Cachos-znver4/linux-linux-cachyos-rt-bore
-Cachos/linux-cachyos-bore
-Cachos/linux-cachyos-rt-bore
Not RT .. thats only for like audio professionals and such.
Like studio recording.
If you dont know that you need it .. you should avoid it.
So then its just the regular bore one or the bore from the repo optimized for your architecture.
I would think you would want the one optimized for your architecture.
( The same as any other package offered, for you, in znver4. )
That’s the thing, I’m not schooled well enough in these to realize which is optimized best for my AMD 7950X and 7900XTX? I haven’t researched the differences in the znver4 versus the others… But I guess I can do that now… Lol.
Its the repo.
Your microarchitecture is znver4.
Thats the ‘optimized repo’ set up for your cachy which is ostensibly compatible with your system.
Any package available to you in that repository is optimized for your architecture.
These are your options.
Only one is optimized.
Its the one with the architecture as part of the repo name.
You should not have multiple architecture-repos enabled .. and your hardware isnt changing … so you are only needing to look out for the one thing.
Also .. if your repositories are correctly configured .. then when you do something like
sudo pacman -Syu linux-cachyos-bore
It should provide the optimized one automatically (if available - in this case it is).
I would use the znver4 versions, because they use instructions of your CPU (like AVX, AVX2, AVX512, etc.) that are not used in the normal cachy kernel.
I think you wont notice a difference between rt and the normal kernel if you are not using time depending stuff like multi channel audio recording, measuring data, etc.
Man, I don’t want to sound like I’m beating a dead horse here, but I truly do appreciate both you and Gozu taking the time to help as much as you both have. I’m that guy as well, on other forums where my true expertise is needed. But when it comes to Linux, I’m an infant. And I’ve experienced some extremely arrogant people on other Linux Forums, who feel like it’s beneath them for you to even ask a question… Lol. Anyway, I truly appreciate it, and your answers make perfectly good sense.
While I was assuming this to be the case, I have learned very early with Linux not to assume, as I was burned severely several times doing this in the beginning days… Cheers!