# Top runs: * **Highest FPS**: `bpfland-main` with approximately 85% higher average FPS compared to `bpfland-next`. * **Smoothest FPS**: `bpfland-main` with a lower standard deviation and variance in FPS by approximately 10%, indicating more consistent performance. * **Best overall**: `bpfland-main` due to significantly higher FPS and more stable performance. # Issues: * The performance of the `bpfland-next` run was significantly lower, with approximately 46% less GPU load and 85% lower average FPS compared to `bpfland-main`. However, the hardware and software configurations were the same, suggesting an issue with performance optimization in this configuration. # Summary This benchmark compares two configurations based on the `bpfland-main` and `bpfland-next` when running osu!stable in conjunction with stress-ng under the `powersave` Linux scheduler on CachyOS. The configuration using `bpfland-main` provided significantly higher and smoother performance, maintaining a much higher GPU load, while `bpfland-next` struggled to achieve similar results. Both configurations were executed on the same hardware, suggesting the `bpfland-next` setup lacks performance optimization, reflected in the substantially lower FPS and GPU utilization despite identical environmental conditions.