KDE is actually faster than GNOME?

[visionaire]

or is it just the GNOME in Ubuntu slow?
Since Gnome is build with GTK which is a C API and QT is a C++ API, wouldn't be GNOME faster?


Regards, Diego

[stmiller]

Oh no here we go... ;)

[Sunflower1970]

Hasn't been this way for me. Gnome has been a bit faster than KDE..

Guess it just depends on the hardware one's using..?

*shrugs*

[stimpack]

KDE is much maligned on these boards. If you do your own mem and cpu tests under each desktop you will find KDE is very sweet indeed. I'll leave you to do this on your own, to avoid flamebaiting.

[starcraft.man]

Uh, I dunno honestly. I tried both when I was starting and found I preferred GNOME (with Beryl). I don't think I picked it cuz of speed (I didn't notice any difference at all on my old p4) though, rather than feel. I just preferred how things were in GNOME. It's just two ways of getting at the same centre of a tootsie pop so to speak :D.

[Bachstelze]

I use KDE because I've used it for eight years, and I just don't feel "at home" in Gnome. I haven't really done any comparisons but all the CPU/RAM usage stats I've done were in advantage of KDE, by far.

[starcraft.man]

I use KDE because I've used it for eight years, and I just don't feel "at home" in Gnome. I haven't really done any comparisons but all the CPU/RAM usage stats I've done were in advantage of KDE, by far.

I knew you'd show up right after me :p.

Maybe I should give KDE a try one of these days again...

[kpolice]

Recently I've been using KDE and well I didn't noticed any difference at all in speed/memory.

The only thing KDE miss IMO is that is near to impossible to create themes from scratch. I know you have Domino, Poliester, QtCurve, etc. but it's either one or the other not like in GNOME where you can easily mix engines/styles. I love to customize my desktop as I want and this is the reason why this point is important for me.

Also KDE has too many options in some configuration tools.

[hellmet]

KDE by itself might be faster/ as fast as Gnome, but when one installs all those K apps, I'm sure things get a lot slower..

[Bachstelze]

Having many apps installed does not make things go slower, if you don't have them all running at the same time...

[GeneralZod]

As is customary, let us first briefly re-visit Zod's Law:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=930372&postcount=25

:)


or is it just the GNOME in Ubuntu slow?
Since Gnome is build with GTK which is a C API and QT is a C++ API, wouldn't be GNOME faster?


For all but very specialist applications (e.g. kernels, embedded stuff, etc), any innate difference in speed between an app/ library written C and one written in C++ is almost inconsequential in comparison to the way the app/ library is architected, its feature-set, the algorithms used/ degree of optimisation, etc. So in general I'd say, No - I wouldn't assume that an app that was written in C would inevitably be faster than an equivalent written in C++. I've never heard anyone say that Metacity was faster than IceWM :)


KDE by itself might be faster/ as fast as Gnome, but when one installs all those K apps, I'm sure things get a lot slower..

Why on Earth would you be "sure" that this is the case? Merely installing an application shouldn't decrease the speed of your computer under any sanely designed OS :confused:

[visionaire]

Hi all, thanks for your opinions, i use both, at first i was a fan of Gnome, then try KDE and like it very much, i used both now and then, but always notice that when i log into KDE all seems faster after a while
So i log into KDE more now... but is cool to change when i get bored to see gnome again :P

[ThinkBuntu]

Usability is more important than what the stopwatch says. Usability reduces necessary effort and saves time, so this is what you should look for before considering which of the two is faster, unless your hardware limits your desktop environment options.

[kakashi]

KDE is nice. i really like the look of. but so far gnome wins for me. maybe its the emerald themes. i don't know ?

[hellmet]

Uhh.. wait, I meant running those K apps. Not just installing them. My bad.

[visionaire]

Usability is more important than what the stopwatch says. Usability reduces necessary effort and saves time, so this is what you should look for before considering which of the two is faster, unless your hardware limits your desktop environment options.

Hi, yes i know, and i like both, for ripping i prefer Grip than Kde alternative, but speed is also important for me, it annoys me when a computer is slow

[patrick295767]

or is it just the GNOME in Ubuntu slow?
Since Gnome is build with GTK which is a C API and QT is a C++ API, wouldn't be GNOME faster?


Regards, Diego

(Pub to other dimension:Try Openbox, you won't get faster (with descent Desktop)) :popcorn: :popcorn:

[kpolice]

KDE is nice. i really like the look of. but so far gnome wins for me. maybe its the emerald themes. i don't know ?

Emerald runs on KDE too.

[visionaire]

(Pub to other dimension:Try Openbox, you won't get faster (with descent Desktop)) :popcorn: :popcorn:

Yes i know that, actually i have fluxbox on an ancient machine :D
But really, i prefer the complete desktop experience, all the integrated bs and that stuff

[visionaire]

BTW, i'm practising my english, it sucks :P

[ThinkBuntu]

As far as apps, choose what you prefer. I love K3B for burning, so I don't have GnomeBaker. I prefer Amarok for music, but GEdit for text editing (Kate sessions are a mess. Just give me a normal file layout and I'll be happy!). And I have all these integrated very nicely in my GNOME desktop.

[visionaire]

As far as apps, choose what you prefer. I love K3B for burning, so I don't have GnomeBaker. I prefer Amarok for music, but GEdit for text editing (Kate sessions are a mess. Just give me a normal file layout and I'll be happy!). And I have all these integrated very nicely in my GNOME desktop.

I like leafpad for text only editing, k3b and amarok are great!
yeap, i used the apps i like independently of the desktop

The Gnome thing is only that i remember it was faster when i use it in CentOS, that is why i'm asking if maybe is just an ubuntu issue or newer gnome is slower

[blackened]

Maybe Zod's law is right: I am biased towards neither and they feel equal in speed.

[Anthem]

They feel about the same to me as well.

Supposedly KDE4 will have a speed increase, but I haven't used it yet and don't know if that's still going to happen.

[Eddie Wilson]

I use the Gnome desktop in Ubuntu 7.04 and I use the Kde desktop in SimplyMepis 6.5 and it does seem that Mepis is a little faster but its not the same distro so I don't think that its a fair compair ison.
Eddie

[mips]

Supposedly KDE4 will have a speed increase, but I haven't used it yet and don't know if that's still going to happen.

I think 'they' claim a expect 20-30% speed increase due to Qt v4 and apparently they have re-written all the code and also using more but smaller libraries now. Not to clued up on the details though.

KDE4 is not a long way off but I don't expect it to as stable as 3.5, that will take time. Hopefully we will see alpha or beta releases incorperated into some of the distros like Sabayon for example.

[visionaire]

I think 'they' claim a expect 20-30% speed increase due to Qt v4 and apparently they have re-written all the code and also using more but smaller libraries now. Not to clued up on the details though.

KDE4 is not a long way off but I don't expect it to as stable as 3.5, that will take time. Hopefully we will see alpha or beta releases incorperated into some of the distros like Sabayon for example.

Even faster than now? That will be cool!

[maniacmusician]

Gutsy actually might have a beta of KDE4

[GeneralZod]

I think 'they' claim a expect 20-30% speed increase due to Qt v4 and apparently they have re-written all the code and also using more but smaller libraries now. Not to clued up on the details though.


I take claims of increased speed with a pinch of salt due to lack of benchmarks* (excepting Zack's polygon benchmarks (http://zrusin.blogspot.com/2006/10/benchmarks.html) which are really not particularly relevant for most desktop apps), but I've seen a handful of pieces of anecdotal evidence that a straight port of an app to Qt4 will reduce its memory usage compared to that when it used Qt3. Of course, KDE4 will add a large amount of new functionality which doesn't come for free, so it might well be the case that the initial "empty desktop" footprint is higher than KDE3's, but it eventually pays for itself when you have several apps open.

Also, by the time KDE4 rolls out, GCC's symbol visibility stuff will hopefully be mature enough for widespread use, which should give significant "free" gains in startup time. Only time will tell, I guess :)

* Although the measurable decrease in mallocs - by 51% according to one test - is a promising sign.

[jbaerbock]

On my HP zv6000 laptop with 512ram and AMD64 processor I find Kubuntu KDE to be faster than Ubuntu Gnome. Ubuntu does boot a tad faster than Kubuntu but once in KDE seems to perform better and also looks sharper (IMHO). Again that's just my experience with it.

[RAV TUX]

or is it just the GNOME in Ubuntu slow?
Since Gnome is build with GTK which is a C API and QT is a C++ API, wouldn't be GNOME faster?


Regards, Diego

If you want speed use Fluxbox or enlightenment 17 instead of GNOME or KDE.

Both Fluxbox and e17 are faster then GNOME and KDE.

[screaminj3sus]

They've been the same speed for the most part in my experience, there' no real noticeable difference, I prefer gnomes simplicity and layout and Theming it is alot easier, but I do like KDE's greater customization and more options also. Although I can think of an exeption where I found KDE alot faster than gnome, PClinuxOS's KDE implementation was blazing fast compared to other distros I have used.