# Top runs: * **Highest FPS**: `BORE` with a Mean FPS significantly higher than others, providing the best frame rate experience. * **Smoothest FPS**: `lavd-ncc` exhibits the lowest StdDev and Variance in FPS, offering a more stable frame rate. * **Best overall**: `BORE` strikes the best balance with considerably higher FPS compared to others, despite a slightly higher StdDev in FPS than the smoothest option. # Issues: * The `BORE` run offers a higher performance profile compared to both `lavd` runs. However, the stability of FPS is compromised with a higher standard deviation and variance in comparison to the more stable `lavd-ncc`. This contrasts the different FPS models, indicating varying trade-offs between performance and stability. * Despite running on identical hardware, both `lavd` runs show a consistent decrease in FPS compared to `BORE`, which might be undesirable in FPS-intensive environments. # Summary In this benchmark comparison between the `BORE` and `lavd` configurations under the `os!stable + stress-ng` scenario on `CachyOS`, performance metrics reveal distinct differences. The `BORE` configuration yields notably higher frames per second, while the `lavd` configurations emphasize stability with reduced FPS variability. Such insights are crucial for users needing either maximum performance, as seen with `BORE`, or smoother gameplay experiences, as characterized by the `lavd-ncc`. Overall, each has merits depending on the specific performance needs and tolerance for FPS variance in gaming or high-computation tasks.