PDA

View Full Version : The #1 answer to all questions about speed



ryaxnb
December 17th, 2008, 01:08 AM
Linux is faster than windows, but windows is faster than linux.

^ That's the answer.

Some Windows are faster than others. Generally Windows gets slower every release. Vista is SLOW on 256-512MB RAM whereas a a good Xfce/LXDE system is quite fast there. 2000 is fast on anything 128MB/PIII+ whereas Puppy Linux is generally even faster than 2000 on a 256MB PIII, and about as fast on a 128MB PII.

XP is fast at app launching, flash, and UI controls. Vista is fast with lots of RAM (3GB+) and Flash, as well as app launching with 1GB+.
Linux is fast at multitasking, repetitive shell tasks, server tasks, minimal DEs, and w/ a moderate (depending on DE, 256-768+) amount of RAM.

2000 is fast at anything, but it's old and can't do much, and its multiprocessing and kernel support is not that great.
Linux doesn't necessairly get slower every release, but it does have a general slowness trend. Linux kernel 2.4 is a lot lighter than kernel 2.6. Ubuntu 8.04 is slower than 6.06, though I'd argue that Ubuntu 6.10 and 7.04 were probably faster, but beginning with 7.10 Ubuntu began to slow down. Xubuntu 8.04 is faster than Xubuntu 8.10, but if you use U-Lite, an Ubuntu based distro, it's faster than Xubuntu.

Overall, U-Lite, PUD, AntiX, TinyMe, SliTaz, DSL, Puppy, are good choices for speed freaks. For moderate speed, choose Xubuntu, Fedora, Vector, Zenwalk, Arch, or Gentoo, preferrably with LXDE or Xfce. Ubuntu, Debian w/GNOME/KDE and Slackware w/ KDE and MEPIS are just kind of average. And Mandriva and SuSE some others are among the slowest.

EDIT: Another tip: consider RAM. The "speed freaks" distros are optimized for 128MB RAM or higher, in general, preferably 256. The "moderate" distros are optimized for around 384-512MB. And the "average" and "slowest" distros generally recommend around 768-1GB for best performance. These are minimum numbers for good performance.
Absolute minimums vary more, but are generally 128MB for Xfce, 64MB for tiny WMs, 256MB for GNOME/KDE and 384MB for Compiz-Fusion.
A good amount of RAM for most any distro is 2GB. Past 2GB you get slightly diminishing returns, and past 8GB (with 64-bit mode on) your returns are tiny.
Virtual Machines usually take up 640MB per machine, so remember to factor that in. For HD space, make sure of a minimum of 8GB per distro. And processor, varies from PII to P4, with most modern distros like Ubuntu needing a P4-class processor for best speed.

Polygon
December 17th, 2008, 01:12 AM
thats a pretty stupid answer.

Changturkey
December 17th, 2008, 01:27 AM
I dunno, Windows 7 is supposed to be pretty darned fast.

jrusso2
December 17th, 2008, 01:29 AM
No distro is going to give good performance at 128 mb of ram when Firefox takes half that.

CholericKoala
December 17th, 2008, 01:51 AM
No distro is going to give good performance at 128 mb of ram when Firefox takes half that.
^^

billgoldberg
December 17th, 2008, 01:59 AM
No distro is going to give good performance at 128 mb of ram when Firefox takes half that.

Light weight distro's shouldn't come with firefox.

I haven't tried any recently, if they do well, shame on them.

Grant A.
December 17th, 2008, 02:01 AM
Atleast Vista pushed up the low-end specifications for specs on new computers. Some of the crap XP would ship with in '05 was ridiculous.

billgoldberg
December 17th, 2008, 02:04 AM
Atleast Vista pushed up the low-end specifications for specs on new computers. Some of the crap XP would ship with in '05 was ridiculous.

I know.

Xp can run perfectly on a PIII with 256mb of ram.

But open up firefox or something and install some apps it and it will slow down to a halt pretty damn fast.

/flashback to 05 with xp on my old dell dimension/

ghostofcain
December 17th, 2008, 02:05 AM
Atleast Vista pushed up the low-end specifications for specs on new computers. Some of the crap XP would ship with in '05 was ridiculous.

I assume you mean 'ship on' although to be honest ship with is also accurate, but IMHO the OS should be flexible enough that it doesn't need 2GB+ just too function, my desktop ran fine on XP with 768MB although a lot finer once I got Ubuntu on to it

JohnFH
December 17th, 2008, 02:09 AM
Linux is faster than windows, but windows is faster than linux.

^ That's the answer.

Some Windows are faster than others. Generally Windows gets slower every release. Vista is SLOW on 256-512MB RAM whereas a a good Xfce/LXDE system is quite fast there. 2000 is fast on anything 128MB/PIII+ whereas Puppy Linux is generally even faster than 2000 on a 256MB PIII, and about as fast on a 128MB PII.

XP is fast at app launching, flash, and UI controls. Vista is fast with lots of RAM (3GB+) and Flash, as well as app launching with 1GB+.
Linux is fast at multitasking, repetitive shell tasks, server tasks, minimal DEs, and w/ a moderate (depending on DE, 256-768+) amount of RAM.

2000 is fast at anything, but it's old and can't do much, and its multiprocessing and kernel support is not that great.
Linux doesn't necessairly get slower every release, but it does have a general slowness trend. Linux kernel 2.4 is a lot lighter than kernel 2.6. Ubuntu 8.04 is slower than 6.06, though I'd argue that Ubuntu 6.10 and 7.04 were probably faster, but beginning with 7.10 Ubuntu began to slow down. Xubuntu 8.04 is faster than Xubuntu 8.10, but if you use U-Lite, an Ubuntu based distro, it's faster than Xubuntu.

Overall, U-Lite, PUD, AntiX, TinyMe, SliTaz, DSL, Puppy, are good choices for speed freaks. For moderate speed, choose Xubuntu, Fedora, Vector, Zenwalk, Arch, or Gentoo, preferrably with LXDE or Xfce. Ubuntu, Debian w/GNOME/KDE and Slackware w/ KDE and MEPIS are just kind of average. And Mandriva and SuSE some others are among the slowest.

EDIT: Another tip: consider RAM. The "speed freaks" distros are optimized for 128MB RAM or higher, in general, preferably 256. The "moderate" distros are optimized for around 384-512MB. And the "average" and "slowest" distros generally recommend around 768-1GB for best performance. These are minimum numbers for good performance.
Absolute minimums vary more, but are generally 128MB for Xfce, 64MB for tiny WMs, 256MB for GNOME/KDE and 384MB for Compiz-Fusion.
A good amount of RAM for most any distro is 2GB. Past 2GB you get slightly diminishing returns, and past 8GB (with 64-bit mode on) your returns are tiny.
Virtual Machines usually take up 640MB per machine, so remember to factor that in. For HD space, make sure of a minimum of 8GB per distro. And processor, varies from PII to P4, with most modern distros like Ubuntu needing a P4-class processor for best speed.

That's a lot of statements that don't seem to be backed up or qualified. Where do you get your data? Did you perform tests yourself, or through research? Where did you do your research? How did you do like-for-like comparisons? Your statements seem plausible but that's all.

Bölvağur
December 17th, 2008, 03:08 AM
Why is it linux vs windows, it is much more interesting to know linux vs solaris vs bsd vs beos. and then compare each os.. the actual operating system, the speed of it, and then compare the software speed ontop of it.