Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30

Thread: Desktop Environments Benchmarks

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    US
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Desktop Environments Benchmarks

    As a continuation of sbergman27's experiments in How to make kubuntu faster like xp that had these results on 96 MB of RAM using Edgy Beta 1:
    Code:
    XFCE Desktop Only: 7
    XFCE Firefox     : 31
    XFCE Epiphany    : 29
    
    Gnome-Core Desktop Only: 19
    Gnome-Core Firefox     : 44
    Gnome-Core Epiphany    : 43
    
    KDE-Core Desktop Only  : 9
    KDE-Core Konqueror     : 15
    KDE-Core Firefox       : 32
    I thought I'd try a few tests on my 766 MHz 128 MB RAM old eMachines with Dapper. Here are the results:
    Code:
    xfce4
    Login: 19
    Firefox: 20
    Konqueror: 34
    
    xubuntu-desktop
    Login: 21
    Firefox: 16
    Konqueror: 26
    
    gnome-core
    Login: 30
    Firefox: 24
    Konqueror: 41
    
    ubuntu-desktop
    Login: 34
    Firefox: 19
    Konqueror: 35
    
    kde-core
    Login: 50
    Firefox: 29
    Konqueror: 11
    
    kubuntu-desktop
    Login: 83
    Firefox: 38
    Konqueror: 13
    To be honest, I'm not quite sure what to make of the results. Clearly XFCE and Xubuntu are faster than both Gnome and KDE... but everybody knew that already, and it's no surprise that Konqueror would load up more quickly in KDE than in Gnome or XFCE.

    By the way, "login" was from the moment I hit Enter after typing in my password until the computer stopped making noise (which was usually a second or two after the wallpaper on the desktop had loaded).

    "Firefox" was from the moment I clicked the Firefox icon to the moment the homepage had fully loaded.

    "Konqueror" was also from the moment I clicked the icon to the moment the homepage had fully loaded.

    The margin of error is plus or minus one second (I just used a regular clock with seconds--no fractions of a second).

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Desktop Environments Benchmarks

    Quote Originally Posted by aysiu View Post

    By the way, "login" was from the moment I hit Enter after typing in my password until the computer stopped making noise (which was usually a second or two after the wallpaper on the desktop had loaded).
    Maybe not the best indicator that the desktop is ready, just bc the hdd has stopped working doesn't mean the DE is ready.

    But thx alot anyway, good test. Now I know that GNOME is faster than KDE even though there was a test sometime ago that said GNOME used more memory. (the tester was a KDE dev so I didn't really trust him)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Beans
    4,368
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.10 Maverick Meerkat

    Re: Desktop Environments Benchmarks

    Now I know that GNOME is faster than KDE
    thats always been the case for me whatever distro i used. kde's area of worst performance must be in the login times. it just takes soooooooo long. kde in suse was the worst. with kde on suse, i used to go and make a coffee, because i knew that by the time i returned it would still be trying to login.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Tokyo
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Desktop Environments Benchmarks

    I didn't try suse for 7 years but did it really become that bad ?
    I will try to test ratposion vs gnome and xfce if get it to install in ubuntu, maybe ion3.
    Why can't technology be as simple as the box it comes in ?

    VAIO X505 800g pure Debian.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Beans
    4,368
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.10 Maverick Meerkat

    Re: Desktop Environments Benchmarks

    I didn't try suse for 7 years but did it really become that bad ?
    yes. i ws using suse 10.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    CT - MA - NY, U.S.
    Beans
    1,619

    Re: Desktop Environments Benchmarks

    Quote Originally Posted by ComplexNumber View Post
    thats always been the case for me whatever distro i used. kde's area of worst performance must be in the login times. it just takes soooooooo long. kde in suse was the worst. with kde on suse, i used to go and make a coffee, because i knew that by the time i returned it would still be trying to login.
    really? logging in takes less than 10 seconds for me with kubuntu. and thats because i have the composite manager enabled, but not composite itself so the composite manager spends 3 or 4 seconds crashing.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Beans
    4,368
    Distro
    Ubuntu 10.10 Maverick Meerkat

    Re: Desktop Environments Benchmarks

    Quote Originally Posted by maniacmusician View Post
    really? logging in takes less than 10 seconds for me with kubuntu. and thats because i have the composite manager enabled, but not composite itself so the composite manager spends 3 or 4 seconds crashing.
    quite a bit different from what aysiu and others get. that means, on your system, that gnome takes about 5/6 second to log in, and xfce takes even less.
    Last edited by ComplexNumber; October 3rd, 2006 at 01:59 PM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    US
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Re: Desktop Environments Benchmarks

    Quote Originally Posted by Engnome View Post
    Maybe not the best indicator that the desktop is ready, just bc the hdd has stopped working doesn't mean the DE is ready.
    So what is the best indication of desktop readiness for a desktop environment? All the icons and panels have loaded and the background has loaded and the hard drive stops buzzing around... is there something else to wait for? I'm not trying to be cheeky. I genuinely want to know, in case I ever do one of these for my faster computer.

    By the way, to those excited about what this proves about Gnome v. KDE, this is one study. I happen to think this study is a good one (as I did it myself, and I'm relatively unbiased when it comes to these kinds of discussions), but it is one study. In fact, sbergman27's numbers seem to go straight against mine (that from 96 MB of RAM).

    To those offended about how long it takes to log into KDE--yes, on my faster computer, it doesn't take nearly as long, but all of these numbers are for a five-year-old computer with a 766 MHz processor and 128 MB of RAM.

    On my newer 2.1 GHz processor with 512 MB of RAM, the differences (if any) between Gnome and KDE are negligible, and both seem deathly slow in comparison to IceWM (what I'm using now).
    Last edited by aysiu; October 3rd, 2006 at 03:56 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Tokyo
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Desktop Environments Benchmarks

    So if I assume Xfce and IceWm performs very close to each other on your faster pc I am not mistaken, am I ?
    Why can't technology be as simple as the box it comes in ?

    VAIO X505 800g pure Debian.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    US
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Re: Desktop Environments Benchmarks

    I haven't done time studies on it yet, but my feeling is that IceWM is faster, yes.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •