Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Power & Memory Usage Of GNOME, KDE, LXDE & Xfce

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ender2070
    replied
    Originally posted by yotambien View Post
    THE FIVE STAGES OF BENCHMARK LOSS

    Stage 1: SHOCK

    The first reaction when you see an article, scanning down to see your competition wipe the floor with you.
    Typical postings: 'WTF', 'no way', 'you lie'...


    ..clipped...
    Miguel, do you think people don't see through your agenda?

    Leave a comment:


  • energyman
    replied
    btw, how was memory consumption measured? ps aux? free? a different way to completely fail?

    Leave a comment:


  • BlackStar
    replied
    139 posts to go

    My point was that one should look at what RAM is executed.
    KDE is now executing RAM?! Bug number? Are virtual machines safe, or are they also affected? I always knew KDE was buggy, but I can't believe they shipped 4.4.1 with such grave bugs!

    Leave a comment:


  • V!NCENT
    replied
    @Yotabien:
    You FAIL.

    Too bad there's a 1min edit tinme limit, because I would have demanded you took away my quotes.

    Nice BS theory of stages, but don't quote me in the WRONG ORDER!

    I said from the beginning the resulst were expected. Kwin was compared to Compiz which has NOTHING to do with Gnome.

    Then you quoted that I said "I don't care for the RAM usage because I have 8GB", but you failed to miss the point COMPLETELY.

    *Oh BTW... I guess this is my denial stage... yeah you fail terribly*

    My point was that one should look at what RAM is executed. The entire idea of sucking up RAM doesn't mean using/changed it and thus means absolutely zero in speed/performance, energy consumption and CPU load. I'm saying it again; you failed.

    Furthermore KDE has shown in the past (with KDE 3.5.x) that when it's feature stripped to the low point of Gnome it has less RAM, less CPU load and thus less battery consumption and is faster. What that means is that Gnome should get first to the point of KDE 4.4.x's features before even being allowed the right to speak out/spoken for.

    But like BlackStar said: this is amusing. Although correction half-truths and half-quotes tires me, it's endless satisfaction

    Leave a comment:


  • BlackStar
    replied
    141 posts to go

    This is amusing. Proceed.

    Leave a comment:


  • atomsymbol
    replied
    Originally posted by yotambien View Post
    By the way, I forgot to mention the Phoronix article from which I ripped the benchmark thing (just in case some newcomer thinks I made it up). Also, it goes without saying that I totally cut and pasted stuff with the sole intention of maximising the comical effect.
    I don't agree with those slides made by Michael Larabel&co. They are implying that Larabel is always right and benchmark critics are always wrong. That's a completely ridiculous implication.

    No attempt whatsoever was made to present an objective summary of the thread and the mentioned authors' posts. I think it's pretty fair, though. : D
    You just confessed that you put those excerpts there without actually understanding them. Nice.

    Leave a comment:


  • aavci
    replied
    Originally posted by yotambien View Post
    THE FIVE STAGES OF BENCHMARK LOSS

    Stage 1: SHOCK

    The first reaction when you see an article, scanning down to see your competition wipe the floor with you.
    Typical postings: 'WTF', 'no way', 'you lie'...
    Oh yotambien, I think you forgot to wear your glasses before reading the posts.

    Nobody ever said that KDE uses less memory than GNOME. Everybody including me just _stated_ that it uses much less than advertised on the front page.

    Leave a comment:


  • atomsymbol
    replied
    The Meta Stage

    THE NEXT STAGE OF BENCHMARK LOSS

    Stage X: THE META STAGE

    Someone with enough spare time will go through all posts in a forum which already contains a lot of messages. The poster creates some sort of a subjective categorization and goes into great length when fitting each post into the set of those categories.
    Typical postings: 'Stage 1: NAME1', 'Stage 2: NAME2', 'STAGE 3: NAME3', ...


    Originally posted by yotambien View Post
    THE FIVE STAGES OF BENCHMARK LOSS

    Stage 1: SHOCK

    The first reaction when you see an article, scanning down to see your competition wipe the floor with you.
    Typical postings: 'WTF', 'no way', 'you lie'...


    Stage 2: DENIAL

    Shock moves to denial very quickly (usually the 2nd sentence in a posting on a benchmark loss). Comments are usually baseless attacks without any analysis or technical basis. Key words: obviously, clearly...

    Stage 3: DISCREDITATION

    We're geeks, so we look for a technical reason for the loss. Typical postings: 'we lost because of debug symbols', 'they left the default config', obviously the problem is in other component', 'they don't know how to test'. Most don't leave this stage.


    Stage 4: ANALYSIS

    Facts are checked, issues and underlying causes are understood.

    Stage 5: ACCEPTANCE

    If you stay the course and make it through the analysis, you ultimately accept the result. The reason for the loss is internalized and implemented upstream.

    Leave a comment:


  • yotambien
    replied
    Originally posted by mugginz View Post
    @yotambien

    So ya got more popcorn on the stove?
    Woah, an almost unlimited stock ; )

    By the way, I forgot to mention the Phoronix article from which I ripped the benchmark thing (just in case some newcomer thinks I made it up). Also, it goes without saying that I totally cut and pasted stuff with the sole intention of maximising the comical effect. No attempt whatsoever was made to present an objective summary of the thread and the mentioned authors' posts. I think it's pretty fair, though. : D

    Leave a comment:


  • mugginz
    replied
    @yotambien

    So ya got more popcorn on the stove?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X