70.7 MB memory used with minimal install

[kerry_s]

Originally Posted by Warpnow The more you use at boot, the less you have for programs, and the more your computer will slow down when you start actually using it.

that is not true, unless you have really low ram 64mb->128mb it is not a factor. i used a full gnome on a laptop with 450mhz 256mb ram for years & there was always enough there was no slowdown, maybe in the past that was so, but not with modern kernels.

[PurposeOfReason]

Originally Posted by Warpnow The more you use at boot, the less you have for programs, and the more your computer will slow down when you start actually using it.

Note: I'm just going to say this and the answer to "why is this so?", "how?" "WTFBBQ?" is "because it is", otherwise I could write way too much on the topic.

Learn how computers allocate memory and cpu usage. Just because it is used at boot does not mean it cannot be set free. An app will use the ram it can so if you have 512Mb of RAM it will take X% of it. If you have 1024Mb, it will still take ~X%, this X being larger because it can. So comparing how much mem is free means nothing if you have varying amounts in a system.

[sertse]

Fluxbox + xfdesktop (manging desktop and it like it's right click compared to fluxbox's own). 39/512 ram. This is my real desktop system (my other screen was a netbook), so I'm not using it just for records.

Aside from the above, it loads wbar, tilda (terminal), xfce4-power-manager.

However as the post above me says, total ram is a factor in determining the ram used. That's why we need weight classes for these competitions, or a way to normalise the ram usage haha

tl;dr - I win once we account for hardware

Well kmandla does, because nothing should run on those specs....but he somehow still makes it do so!

[Xbehave]

Originally Posted by kerry_s that is not true, unless you have really low ram 64mb->128mb it is not a factor. i used a full gnome on a laptop with 450mhz 256mb ram for years & there was always enough there was no slowdown, maybe in the past that was so, but not with modern kernels.

+1
With 256mb I didn't have enough ram for compiz and firefox3.0*, but i could run compiz + other programs or firefox3.0 w/o compiz

*I've since got more ram, so maybe compiz and firefox3.5 are better now

[Pogeymanz]

Originally Posted by PrimoTurbo That is not that impressive, to be honest. Here is an openbox setup that I had on my Pentium 3 with 256MB SDRAM, this was arch however. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_XUmI7vpDsm...x768_scrot.png 32MB, openbox, conky, lxpanel, nitrogen, terminal, synergy, htop. You should check out kmandla's stuff, he has even lower footprint setups on his older computers.

Sure, but if you had 512MB RAM, your set up would probably take up almost twice as much as it is now. Memory requirements inflate with more available RAM.

[xuCGC002]

Originally Posted by MasterNetra Not too far behind gnome I hear.

You're thinking of Xubuntu. XFCE by itself uses very little RAM.

[cascade9]

Originally Posted by nw2001 At the risk of sounding like a complete fool. I always assumed if I didnt have anything going while using something like LXDE, And you opened up a system monitor, I'd think most of it would be the system monitor it self using resources. *Shrugs*

Thats accurate in my experience.

[Warpnow]

Originally Posted by PurposeOfReason Note: I'm just going to say this and the answer to "why is this so?", "how?" "WTFBBQ?" is "because it is", otherwise I could write way too much on the topic. Learn how computers allocate memory and cpu usage. Just because it is used at boot does not mean it cannot be set free. An app will use the ram it can so if you have 512Mb of RAM it will take X% of it. If you have 1024Mb, it will still take ~X%, this X being larger because it can. So comparing how much mem is free means nothing if you have varying amounts in a system.

That's why I'm not (nor has anyone else in the thread I've noticed) measuring total ram used. They are measuring the amount used by the system in the form of buffers and cache.