KDE Faster than gnome?

[Primefalcon]

I used Gnome predominately for the last 4 years on Ubuntu, I have on a few occasions tried KDE only to constantly come back to Gnome due to Gnomes better performances well as more business like (at least to me) setup.

However I have been growing a little tired of a few glitches Nautilus has been throwing at me and have actually been using Dolphin more and more, since nautilus seems to act laggy on folders with a lot of documents and such.

I realized since I was using dolphin predominately anyhow and was trying to make it the default in gnome, with major problems of course I'd just try KDE again.....

I have to admit, I was blown away, it's improved a hell of a lot since I last tried it, it's actually faster than Gnome and a lot more configurable, I like...... Gnome will have to pull up it's socks because in my opinion KDE has blown right past it...... (bear in mind that I've always been a gnome guy)

[SuperSonic4]

Just wait for KDE 4.4 ;)

It's unsurprising because KDE has come on in leaps and bounds since 4.0 (which is still better than gnome IMO) whereas Gnome is pretty old now.

I personally prefer the integration of KDE apps with the system, for example dolphin can play music files and gwenview/digikam can export to facebook.

As for those who say gnome 3 will be better that is like the second coming of Jesus- it may be good but nobody actually knows.

[Virtual Liberty]

While it might perform better than Gnome on newer machines, mine still doesn't like it. Sluggish as shell.

[ZankerH]

Whether or not KDE is indeed faster than GNOME doesn't really have much bearing on anything in the Ubuntu world, because the integration of KDE in the Kubuntu software distribution of GNU/Linux is downright terrible.

Ubuntu just doesn't make a good KDE-based GNU/Linux distro. Arch, Fedora, Debian or Mandrake are much better in that regard. Since I don't use KDE primarily on any of them, I couldn't care any less. I'm using GNOME 2 as long as it's supported, then I'm moving completely to a minimal tiling WM.

Unless the GNOME devs start to see some sense and include the traditional UI with GNOME 3.

[SuperSonic4]

While it might perform better than Gnome on newer machines, mine still doesn't like it. Sluggish as shell.

htop says 519mb with 2 KMess, Juk, Konsole (Pacman), Dolphin and Minefield

Perhaps it's time for a RAM upgrade?

[cascade9]

While it might perform better than Gnome on newer machines, mine still doesn't like it. Sluggish as shell.

Same on the old P3 tester I have around here. Thats ubuntu/kubuntu though, so its possible that a better KDE distro wouldnt be as bad.

KDE4.1 ran like crap on my hardly new but still more than fast enough system (X2 +4800, 2GB, 8600GT) with and of the distros I tried (Sabayon, Arch, PC-BSD.....er....something else I cant recall). I'm really going to have to try out KDE4.3 and see if its any better.

[mivo]

Ubuntu just doesn't make a good KDE-based GNU/Linux distro. Arch, Fedora, Debian or Mandrake are much better in that regard.

In my opinion, OpenSUSE 11.2 takes the cake when it comes to KDE implementation. They did an amazing job with it.

[SuperSonic4]

Same on the old P3 tester I have around here. Thats ubuntu/kubuntu though, so its possible that a better KDE distro wouldnt be as bad.

KDE4.1 ran like crap on my hardly new but still more than fast enough system (X2 +4800, 2GB, 8600GT) with and of the distros I tried (Sabayon, Arch, PC-BSD.....er....something else I cant recall). I'm really going to have to try out KDE4.3 and see if its any better.

KDE 4.4 beta 1 comes on on Tuesday

http://techbase.kde.org/Schedules/KDE4/4.4_Release_Schedule

[Virtual Liberty]

htop says 519mb with 2 KMess, Juk, Konsole (Pacman), Dolphin and Minefield

Perhaps it's time for a RAM upgrade?

I've considered it ( as I currently have only 512MB ) but the cost of DDR1 somehow keeps me away from purchasing one ( ~ $50 / 1 GB ).

[Xbehave]

KDE and gnome are pretty comparible in performance, it really depends what your doing in them, e.g if you have compositing turned on in kde it's slower than gnome without compiz. If you have both of them running comparable work loads i doubt there is a noticeable difference in performance, the only major difference is how easily customisable kde is, both have similar performance and can be made to look the same.


Ubuntu just doesn't make a good KDE-based GNU/Linux distro. Arch, Fedora, Debian or Mandrake are much better in that regard.
Please stop repeating that nonsense:
Debian's KDE is pretty much the same as ubuntu's only it lacks some tweaks
Fedora isn't any better/worse than ubuntu, all of fedora's tools are gtk based.
Arch, last time i checked the official kde wasn't even modular
Mandrake (and openSuse) I haven't used, but i wish people would stop repeating the anti-kubuntu nonsense

BTW i'm not a rabid kubuntu fan or anything, infact i'm using fedora at the moment, but the baseless badmouthing just pisses me off

[cookiecruncher]

I don't have any issues with KDE (kubuntu) that are worth complaining about.

[cascade9]

KDE 4.4 beta 1 comes on on Tuesday

http://techbase.kde.org/Schedules/KDE4/4.4_Release_Schedule

Somwhere in 2011-2012 it will be out for Debian, right? LOL

Thanks for the info, but beta software is something I avoid. But its nice to know its moving on along. Only question is, how long till they give up on KDE 4.x and decide that KDE 5 is next up?

[NoaHall]

The day KDE is faster than Gnome 2.*, is the day I'll grow a tail and wings.

[SuperSonic4]

KDE and gnome are pretty comparible in performance, it really depends what your doing in them, e.g if you have compositing turned on in kde it's slower than gnome without compiz. If you have both of them running comparable work loads i doubt there is a noticeable difference in performance, the only major difference is how easily customisable kde is, both have similar performance and can be made to look the same.


Please stop repeating that nonsense:
Debian's KDE is pretty much the same as ubuntu's only it lacks some tweaks
Fedora isn't any better/worse than ubuntu, all of fedora's tools are gtk based.
Arch, last time i checked the official kde wasn't even modular
Mandrake (and openSuse) I haven't used, but i wish people would stop repeating the anti-kubuntu nonsense

BTW i'm not a rabid kubuntu fan or anything, infact i'm using fedora at the moment, but the baseless badmouthing just pisses me off

May I suggest an updated check because kde is indeed modular with KDE 4.X


pacman -S kdemultimedia for example

[mivo]

Arch, last time i checked the official kde wasn't even modular

KDEmod?

[Primefalcon]

The day KDE is faster than Gnome 2.*, is the day I'll grow a tail and wings.
Well I am only running a single core celeron processor and 1g of ram and kde is flying, gnome whereas I have been having issues with lag in gnome most notably in nautilus as I said.....

Whats that growing out of your back?

[NoaHall]

Well I am only running a single core celeron processor and 1g of ram and kde is flying, gnome whereas I have been having issues with lag in gnome most notably in nautilus as I said.....

Whats that growing out of your back?

KDE is slower than Gnome. That's the rules. Other things, which in your case, maybe Compiz vs kwin, don't come into it.

However, I will admit KDE is very pretty. *Oh look, it's so shiny*
It's just slow. Even the menu-layout is very slow..

[Primefalcon]

KDE is slower than Gnome. That's the rules. Other things, which in your case, maybe Compiz vs kwin, don't come into it.

However, I will admit KDE is very pretty. *Oh look, it's so shiny*
It's just slow. Even the menu-layout is very slow..
I wasn't using compiz on gnome, just metacity 0 special effects, might be worth giving it another try? really I it used to be slow as hell for me as well

[NoaHall]

Hm... So you're telling me, Gnome is faster on the high-end machines, but slower on the old machines, where as KDE is faster on the older machines, but slower on the high-end? ?

[Primefalcon]

Hm... So you're telling me, Gnome is faster on the high-end machines, but slower on the old machines, where as KDE is faster on the older machines, but slower on the high-end? ?
All I am saying is on my setup which is getting more and more on the low scale these days KDE is faster and nautilus can take upwards of 5 minutes at items just to open a window that has a lot of files, and I'm noticed a lot of other aps are really starting to lag on it as well now. whereas KDE is well instant snappy, as I said they've really shaped up their act

[SuperSonic4]

KDEmod?

A third party repo maintained by the Chakra guys (it's very good though)


KDE is slower than Gnome. That's the rules. Other things, which in your case, maybe Compiz vs kwin, don't come into it.

However, I will admit KDE is very pretty. *Oh look, it's so shiny*
It's just slow. Even the menu-layout is very slow for me..

Fixed.

[NoaHall]

Oh come on, it's slow for everyone. Didn't you say, that you have to click one more time when compared with Gnome? To me, that's a lot of wasted time.

[Primefalcon]

Oh come on, it's slow for everyone. Didn't you say, that you have to click one more time when compared with Gnome? To me, that's a lot of wasted time.
One more time at what? the menu's are a lot better arranged as well and the folder and files are single click by default in dolhpin

[mivo]

A third party repo maintained by the Chakra guys (it's very good though)

I know, but Xbehave didn't seem to realise that Arch folks, for the most part, don't use vanilla KDE, but KDEmod, and it's really quite good. :)

[SuperSonic4]

Oh come on, it's slow for everyone. Didn't you say, that you have to click one more time when compared with Gnome? To me, that's a lot of wasted time.

Single click is default so it would be one less time.


I know, but Xbehave didn't seem to realise that Arch folks, for the most part, don't use vanilla KDE, but KDEmod, and it's really quite good. :)

That is true although the gap between them has got smaller recently, I found that KDEmod has a lot of extra stuff that is otherwise only in the AUR, especially SVN versions

[Xbehave]

I know, but Xbehave didn't seem to realise that Arch folks, for the most part, don't use vanilla KDE, but KDEmod, and it's really quite good. :)
Actually i do that's why i said official, as nice as kdemod and AUR are, they are not the most stable way's of running your system. Apparently the official KDE is now modular though, so kde in arch is probably going places.