# Top runs: * **Highest FPS**: `BORE` delivers the highest average FPS, providing around 13% more FPS compared to other configurations, though with slightly greater variability. * **Smoothest FPS**: Among the options, `BPFLAND` is notably smoothest, exhibiting around 12% less variability than other runs, ensuring stable frame rates. * **Best overall**: `BPFLAND Next` presents the optimal balance between high FPS and stability, with approximately 11% higher FPS than `BPFLAND` while maintaining a low variability close to the smoothest run. # Issues: * The `BORE` run, despite its superior FPS, exhibits around 12% higher variability compared to other methods, which can affect frame time consistency. * All setups utilize the same hardware and software, confirming that the FPS discrepancies are likely due to scheduler performance rather than system configuration differences. # Summary This benchmark comparison focuses on the performance of the Linux schedulers in a CPU-limited scenario running the game Hollow Knight. Each configuration is run using the `Freedesktop SDK`, with the `performance` governor maintaining a consistent high-performance mode. Among the tested schedulers, `BORE` achieved the highest FPS, making it ideal for maximizing frame rates in specific situations. However, `BPFLAND` demonstrated superior frame rate stability, essential for maintaining a smooth visual experience. The `BPFLAND Next` variant succeeded in providing a well-rounded performance, balancing a high frame rate with relatively low variability, thus emerging as the best overall choice under these specific benchmarking conditions.