# Top runs: * **Highest FPS**: `bpfland -c 0 -k` with a slightly higher average FPS than others. * **Smoothest FPS**: `bpfland -c 0 -k` due to the lowest standard deviation and variance. * **Best overall**: `bpfland -c 0 -k`, combining the highest FPS with smooth stability. # Issues: * The configuration using `bpfland -t 0 -p -k` has a lower average FPS compared to others in the same benchmark, being approximately 4% lesser than the highest FPS run. # Summary The benchmark was conducted using a consistent hardware and software setup across all runs with the difference in scheduling configurations. The run with `bpfland -c 0 -k` emerged as the best performer, achieving the highest average FPS with minimal variance, which signifies more stable performance. Meanwhile, the setup with `bpfland -t 0 -p -k` showed a reduced performance, suggesting that this particular configuration may introduce slight inefficiencies under these test conditions. Overall, the benchmark provides clear insights into how different scheduling parameters can impact performance even when other system factors remain constant.