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

[V!NCENT]

But the cache may share some physical memory pages with executables and libraries. Did you know about that?

So, when you do (TOTAL_USED_MEMORY - MEMORY_USED_BY_CACHE) you might in fact be subtracting away memory belonging to executables and libraries.

So let's look at the source code and see what files are loaded into RAM.

Then compile Gnome and KDE under the same conditions with the same settings and compare the sizes of the loaded binary files.

Then compare them in percentages to each other (because each different compile may differ in size of the binairies...)

[Guest]

Monkey intelligence

That said, you seem to miss the fact that syslog and similar processes add a constant amount of overhead that affects all measurements. They don't skew results one way or another when comparing DEs (as was done here).

What is your IQ, my dear?

I'm sorry, but that rhetorical question, in itself, is extremely stupid and says more about you than about BlackStar...

Fact 1: BlackStar wrote that adding a constant does not skew results.
Fact 2: Phoronix uses percentages in the article.
Fact 3: Adding a constant to a divisor or a dividend skews results.
Conclusion: BlackStar is wrong.

Now you are going to reply that an average monkey can learn in two weeks what I just said and can contemplate about it in internet forums. OK, simply go on, make a reply about those monkeys.

[V!NCENT]

Fact 1: BlackStar wrote that adding a constant does not skew results.
Fact 2: Phoronix uses percentages in the article.
Fact 3: Adding a constant to a divisor or a dividend skews results.
Conclusion: BlackStar is wrong.

Fact 4: This has nothing to do with IQ
Fact 5: You just want to win
Fact 6: You failed

[Guest]

Nondeteministic compilers ?

Then compare them in percentages to each other (because each different compile may differ in size of the binairies...)

Can you show me an example of a non-deterministic Linux compiler? (Different timestamps, version infos, etc., do not count.)

[Guest]

Monkey intelligence

Fact 4: This has nothing to do with IQ
Fact 5: You just want to win
Fact 6: You failed

I don't see any monkeys in your reply. Monkeys are essential in making a solid argument, you know ...

[V!NCENT]

I don't see any monkeys in your reply.

That's correct...

Monkeys are essential in making a solid argument, you know ...

No, because they are not essential. They can, however, be used to explain solid arguments.

Which leads me to why BlackStar is winning:
We are engaging in a social discussion and BlackStar is awesome at trolling and you failed to grasp that. A social event (quantum physics -> overruling) can't be concluded because it is not logic, but the result of logic and avarages.

I (1) and BlackStar (2) versus you (3).
(2/3) > (1/3) = you lose.

[V!NCENT]

Can you show me an example of a non-deterministic Linux compiler? (Different timestamps, version infos, etc., do not count.)

Shall we also include spacetime while we are at it? Just use GCC...

Oh and the CPU cash is also deterministic so while we are at it: do you have an undeterministic compute unit to test it on, because by your logic your own RAM tests fail also

[mugginz]

No, it is not clear to me. I agree it is maybe clear to yourself, but if you publish it subjective clarity is not sufficient.

It would only be unclear to someone who hadn't read my previous posts on the subject, somebody exercising a wanton desire to cloud the current discussion with irrelevance, or someone unable to grasp the entirety of what is being put forward.

"Used memory" is a very broad term.

Not for the purposes of this discussion. It's quite well understood from the original article what is trying to be determined. And given the gravity (or mostly lack thereof) of the results on the DE choice of the readers here, some inaccuracies can be tolerated. The biggest problem I had with the original figures was that they were quite far off from what I had personally experienced, and so thought there was likely some large error. As it turns out, there was.

[B]But the cache may share some physical memory pages with executables and libraries. Did you know about that?

If absolute accuracy was required I'd be passing a dump of /proc/meminfo. (no jokes about passing a dump )
Given the size of error introduced by the 'cached' element relative to the other values I felt it reasonable to go with my current methodology. Remember what is trying to be determined.

Surely it's mostly to inform the readers whether a particular desktop environment has a meaningful impact on the quality of experience for an end user due to excessive memory consumption relative to the other choices available to an individual.

[V!NCENT]

Surely it's mostly to inform the readers whether a particular desktop environment has a meaningful impact on the quality of experience for an end user due to excessive memory consumption relative to the other choices available to an individual.

Is your subconscious also hinting your conscious that we are dealing with a autistic person here? X'D

[mugginz]

Is your subconscious also hinting your conscious that we are dealing with a autistic person here? X'D

That's one possibility.

An inability to grasp the greater goings on and instead focus on minutia to the detriment of the larger argument.

(apologies for the rambling sentences.)