Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

KDE's Leaner Experience On openSUSE Tumbleweed vs. Ubuntu 17.04

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by useless View Post

    I've set another VM with Ubuntu in it. Installed plasma-desktop, gnome-shell and ubuntu-gnome-desktop, just... because. Didn't remove any DE, always rebooted before switching session. Here is what I found:

    KDE Plasma uses ~ 480 MiB
    GNOME desktop uses ~ 700 MiB.

    In Plasma session there are a couple of GNOME related process (Tracker, GOA, gnome keyring, etc), still, never over ~ 500 MiB of RAM.
    In GNOME session, only kwallet seems to be running (6 MiB), still, never over 800 MiB.

    So, again, what's up with that PTS result?
    VM uses less RAM than actuall machine, at least for me..., but I use smb services etc., so maybe that's why, but I suspect it is because VM have less RAM than actual machine, just a speculation. Also, proper methodology is not to use "subjective tools" to measure free, used, buffered etc. RAM, the only valid method is to use "free -m" command in my opinion, repeat the test and see by yourself what the actual usage is.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Shiba View Post

      If a minimal KDE is your idea of a "full desktop environment", I have no doubt you really believe Xfce is as well. Well, next time you need a PIM or a metadata indexed filesystem on your reduced environment, you could always... dunno, drag your panel around the screen... maybe it will serve some purpose.

      Removing Akonadi equates a minimal install of KDE...

      Oh the irony of a Gnome user talking about reduced functionality in KDE...

      Comment


      • #33
        Michael
        Maybe you could do this with Neon and Kubuntu and compare the results with these. I know Kubuntu is at the mercy of Ubuntu for a lot of their packaging but I would like to see if there is a difference vs Ubuntu + KDE.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by leipero View Post

          VM uses less RAM than actuall machine, at least for me..., but I use smb services etc., so maybe that's why, but I suspect it is because VM have less RAM than actual machine, just a speculation. Also, proper methodology is not to use "subjective tools" to measure free, used, buffered etc. RAM, the only valid method is to use "free -m" command in my opinion, repeat the test and see by yourself what the actual usage is.
          EDIT: By the way: VM uses less RAM than actual machine? How's that?

          Here:
          Post with 1 views. Plasma KDE memory usage in Ubuntu
          Last edited by useless; 09-01-2017, 09:02 PM.

          Comment


          • #35
            And here:

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by useless View Post

              EDIT: By the way: VM uses less RAM than actual machine? How's that?

              Here:
              Well, that was my speculation and I explained why that is the case for me, still, since I did not test that specifically, I accept that might not be the case, it could be other reason than services, it could be that system uses more RAM if more is available, and I usually give VM's ~4GiB, while there's more on real hardware, another speculation I did not tested.

              Yeah, using "free -m" when doing comparison, those are results I've got earlier and wrote on main article thread.

              So, Kubuntu 17.04 results for "free -m" after fresh boot and wait time of 4 minutes are:
              total=3949, used=402, free=2819, shared=7, buff/cache=727, available=3321

              Results for Ubuntu GNOME 17.04 under same conditions as above (same wait period):
              total=3949, used=697, free=2727, shared=8, buff/cache=524, available=3029

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Shiba View Post
                So a KDE stripped down to the same functionality as Fluxbox boots as fast as a full GNOME environment?
                No, full featured KDE boots as fast as stripped down DE which is Gnome. It also uses less memory and offers much more features same time. Furthermore, 'full' KDE in Kubuntu uses about 600MB, so Phoronix Ubuntu benchmark is messed up.
                Last edited by Pawlerson; 09-02-2017, 04:11 AM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  leipero
                  I get the same memory results on 3 physical machines with Kubuntu 17.04.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by GhostOfFunkS View Post
                    Oh what a mess. You can't really do one dist, multiple desktops. It is the usual test case explosion.

                    Luckily Wayland can solve this. Not because it is magic code, it just makes desktop development outside GNOME much more demanding.
                    Yawn............ is there some way we can report gnome trolls to gnome developers to point out the gnome trolls are making them look stupid?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by rtfazeberdee View Post

                      Yawn............ is there some way we can report gnome trolls to gnome developers to point out the gnome trolls are making them look stupid?
                      Plus I guess they don't realise their general stupidity of their comments. If a product/framework makes development harder, then surely that is a refection on the the framework's poor quality? Lol.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X