Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 64

Thread: Ubuntu Unity Proves Very Slow To KDE, GNOME, Xfce, LXDE

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,456

    Default Ubuntu Unity Proves Very Slow To KDE, GNOME, Xfce, LXDE

    Phoronix: Ubuntu Unity Proves Very Slow To KDE, GNOME, Xfce, LXDE

    Earlier this week when benchmarking the latest Unity and Compiz packages for Ubuntu 12.10, I mentioned a new OpenGL desktop comparison was forthcoming. Those results from the Ubuntu 12.10 development snapshot are now available with the default Unity desktop being compared to KDE, GNOME, Xfce, and LXDE. In no test did the Unity desktop yield the fastest performance with nearly every time the default Ubuntu desktop being left in last place for performance.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=17847

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    134

    Default

    I guess that suspention of KDE doesn't work with a dual-monitor setup?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    230

    Default

    Good cause in some technical parts Unity is bad (it copies existing Apis and just rename them like with Unity.MediaPlayer and Mpris) just look at Unity APIs and for the most parts you'll find an equivalent at freedesktop.org.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Russia
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Thank you Michael for this benchmark, looks like it's time to move to the Xubuntu/Kubuntu

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by M1AU View Post
    I guess that suspention of KDE doesn't work with a dual-monitor setup?
    KDE works flawless with Dual-Monitor: my System http://www.sysprofile.de/id123113.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,934

    Default Why?

    Why are some faster and slower than others?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    245

    Default

    I'm curious about the effect of "Undirect fullscreen windows" option for compiz, I think it would be interesting to see its effect(and possibly a couple more options that could improve performance, basically disable "Sync to Vblank" and "Detect framerate", also inserting the appropriate value for the framerate on the same page).
    I know that the tests performed here were mostly meant to test default configurations, but I'd be interested to see this tested as well. I've noticed that this option can cause some bugginess .. So is it worth it?

    And so .. Was anyone saying KDE is heavy and slow and that XFCE is better for performance/gaming etc?


    Edit: Should have also said .. Thanks for the benchmarks, it's good to have those comparisons.
    (Although I'm also curious if different hardware[graphics card] causes significant changes)

  8. #8

    Default

    Maybe, Canonical should think about using kWin instead of Compiz.

    So, according to these tests, previous results from other tests would be much better if you were using kWin??

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    419

    Default

    Seems like the answer is obvious. Copy what KDE did. KDE with effects on is nearly identical in performance to Unity without fullscreen mode on, but it performs on the level of uncompositied desktops when using full screen mode.

    Unity should just implement what the KDE group did. Seems to work.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    34

    Talking

    Wasn't L4D2 faster on Ubuntu than on Windows?
    Didn't that Ubuntu use Unity? [http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/linux.../#comment-4328]

    Just imagine a "KDE SC 4.9 - Suspended" so much more frames per second

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •