LinuxQuestions.org
Register a domain and help support LQ
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Password
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 01-05-2014, 04:35 AM   #1
rubankumars
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2010
Location: india
Distribution: debian 8,trisquel 7, parabola gnu/linux-libre
Posts: 141

Rep: Reputation: 12
KDE vs Gnome vs lxde vs xfce vs window managers for old computers.


I have an old pc which is P4 2.85 Ghz, 2 GB RAM, Intel 8280 chipset.
I am running a icewm+xfe+lightdm based debian linux (wheezy) on it.
I know this setup is lightweight and it runs very well on my system.
I want to know whether Gnome 3 ,kde 4 ,lxde and xfce for my debian wheezy (from official repo only) will run slowly or fast?
And are the latest kde and gnome releases will run faster or slower in my PC.
I am very sure that both gnome and kde (from official repo and latest) will run slower in my pc.Am I wrong?
Please don't say Go and Try.My bandwidth speed is very low.
 
Old 01-05-2014, 05:35 AM   #2
brianL
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Oldham, Lancs, England
Distribution: Slackware & Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 7,453
Blog Entries: 55

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Rarely used Gnome, but I should think it's about the same as KDE. KDE4 might run slowly, depending on how many things you've got running. XFCE and LXDE are lighter on resources, so should be faster. And there is no substitute for trying these things for yourself.
 
Old 01-05-2014, 09:50 AM   #3
TroN-0074
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Location: Michigan USA
Distribution: OpenSUSE 13.2 64bit-Gnome on ASUS U52F
Posts: 1,444

Rep: Reputation: 340Reputation: 340Reputation: 340Reputation: 340
I think LXDE is a good choice when looking for a light weight graphical interface. However this is a matter of personal taste. Your computer might still be able to run KDE with all the 3D special effects turned off but it will be a little slow still. I think KDE uses 700MB from your RAM just to run.
Gnome probably wont run at all or who knows we might be surpriced. If it run though it will take away one of the two GB of RAM you have in your computer.

When looking for a windows manager I tent to preffer Engligtenment because it gives you lots of stuff from full desktop managers. I like to pair Enlightement with PCmanFM file browser
I also like Slim for display manager instead of GDM or LightDM.

I dont dislike any graphical interface I just think they have their own place with the right machine.

Good luck to you
 
Old 01-05-2014, 10:06 AM   #4
rokytnji
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Waaaaay out West Texas
Distribution: AntiX 15 , ChromeOS
Posts: 4,915
Blog Entries: 19

Rep: Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125
I run Icewm on this Atom 270 netbook with 2 gig of ram with slim with AntiX with Debian Testing .
I put a ssd in it. It powers on from touching the power button and gets me to slim login screen in 13 seconds (1 Mississippi at a time).

On the exact same netbook specs but with a platter pata drive. I run XFCE with Solydxk and it takes a bit longer (I never did the Mississippi test) to get to lightdm but I never let it concern me.

The amount of processes running in XFCE vs Icewm is miles apart. More processes means a speed hit. SSD helps with speed hits I guess.

I would not bring KDE, or Gnome near these netbooks. Maybe RazorQT or Mate.
E17 would be another.

Specs on what I am talking about.

Code:
$ inxi -Fxz
System:    Host: biker Kernel: 3.12-6.towo-siduction-686-pae i686 (32 bit, gcc: 4.8.2) 
           Desktop: IceWM 1.3.7 Distro: antiX-13_386-full Luddite 01 June 2013
Machine:   System: manda product: Intel powered classmate PC version: Gen 1.5L
           Mobo: N/A model: N/A Bios: American Megatrends version: CM94515A.86A.0024.2008.0715.1716 date: 07/15/2008
CPU:       Single core Intel Core CPU N270 (-HT-) cache: 512 KB flags: (nx pae sse sse2 sse3 ssse3) bmips: 3192.06 
           Clock Speeds: 1: 800.00 MHz 2: 1600.00 MHz
Graphics:  Card: Intel Mobile 945GSE Express Integrated Graphics Controller bus-ID: 00:02.0 
           X.Org: 1.14.5 drivers: intel (unloaded: fbdev,vesa) Resolution: 1024x600@53.3hz 
           GLX Renderer: Mesa DRI Intel 945GME x86/MMX/SSE2 GLX Version: 2.1 Mesa 9.2.2 Direct Rendering: Yes
Audio:     Card: Intel NM10/ICH7 Family High Definition Audio Controller driver: snd_hda_intel bus-ID: 00:1b.0 
           Sound: Advanced Linux Sound Architecture ver: k3.12-6.towo-siduction-686-pae
Network:   Card: Realtek RTL8101E/RTL8102E PCI Express Fast Ethernet controller 
           driver: r8169 ver: 2.3LK-NAPI port: ec00 bus-ID: 01:00.0
           IF: eth1 state: down mac: <filter>
Drives:    HDD Total Size: 63.3GB (51.4% used) 1: id: /dev/sda model: KingSpec_KSD size: 63.3GB 
Partition: ID: / size: 59G used: 31G (56%) fs: ext2 
Sensors:   System Temperatures: cpu: 64.0C mobo: N/A 
           Fan Speeds (in rpm): cpu: N/A 
Info:      Processes: 103 Uptime: 1:01 Memory: 277.6/2015.1MB Runlevel: 5 Gcc sys: 4.8.2 
           Client: Shell (bash 4.2.45) inxi: 1.9.17
 
Old 01-05-2014, 10:26 AM   #5
dolphin_oracle
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 335

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
xfce and lxde would be your best choices, as gnome 3 and kde 4 are both resource intensive on the graphics side. You didn't mention your graphics card, but given the age of the machine, you would likely have issues.

of the 2, i like xfce if I'm using a desktop environment, but I rarely do. LXDE is the least resource intensive, and the most like running just a wm with a panel added. I'm currently using fluxbox with a lxde panel for shortcuts.

I've got an xfce 4.8 (from debian wheezy repos) installed on a atom system with 2 gb of ram. runs pretty well, but there is a noticeable difference between fluxbox or icewm and xfce on that system. If you are used to operating with just a windowmanager, and icewm is a pretty good one, you may be disapointed with a full de.

fun fact: lxde used to use icewm as it's window manager, but they switched to openbox several years ago.
 
Old 01-05-2014, 10:45 AM   #6
rokytnji
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Waaaaay out West Texas
Distribution: AntiX 15 , ChromeOS
Posts: 4,915
Blog Entries: 19

Rep: Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125Reputation: 2125
Howdy D.O.

I just booted the other netbook to show the differences between XFCE with lightdm on the other Netbook. On the boot test I timed it at 40 seconds to lightdm but I blame the slow
pata hard drive on this one. Check out ram usage and number of processes running vs Icewm in
my last post.

Code:
$ inxi -Fxz
System:    Host: biker Kernel: 3.11-2-486 i686 (32 bit, gcc: 4.8.2) 
           Desktop: Xfce 4.10.2 (Gtk 2.24.18) Distro: SolydXK 1 testing
Machine:   System: manda product: Intel powered classmate PC version: Gen 1.5L
           Mobo: N/A model: N/A Bios: American Megatrends version: CM94515A.86A.0024.2008.0715.1716 date: 07/15/2008
CPU:       Single core Intel Core CPU N270 (-UP-) cache: 512 KB flags: (nx pae sse sse2 sse3 ssse3) bmips: 3192.08 clocked at 1600.00 MHz 
Graphics:  Card: Intel Mobile 945GSE Express Integrated Graphics Controller bus-ID: 00:02.0 
           X.Org: 1.14.5 drivers: intel (unloaded: fbdev,vesa) Resolution: 1024x600@53.3hz 
           GLX Renderer: Mesa DRI Intel 945GME x86/MMX/SSE2 GLX Version: 2.1 Mesa 9.2.2 Direct Rendering: Yes
Audio:     Card: Intel NM10/ICH7 Family High Definition Audio Controller driver: snd_hda_intel bus-ID: 00:1b.0 
           Sound: Advanced Linux Sound Architecture ver: k3.11-2-486
Network:   Card: Realtek RTL8101E/RTL8102E PCI Express Fast Ethernet controller 
           driver: r8169 ver: 2.3LK-NAPI port: ec00 bus-ID: 01:00.0
           IF: eth0 state: down mac: <filter>
Drives:    HDD Total Size: 30.0GB (51.2% used) 1: id: /dev/sda model: SAMSUNG_HS030GB size: 30.0GB 
Partition: ID: / size: 6.7G used: 5.8G (92%) fs: ext3 ID: /home size: 20G used: 8.6G (48%) fs: ext3 
           ID: swap-1 size: 1.58GB used: 0.00GB (0%) fs: swap 
Sensors:   System Temperatures: cpu: 34.0C mobo: N/A 
           Fan Speeds (in rpm): cpu: N/A 
Info:      Processes: 148 Uptime: 3 min Memory: 347.3/2015.9MB Runlevel: 2 Gcc sys: 4.8.2 
           Client: Shell (bash 4.2.45) inxi: 1.9.17
I installed this just as a adventure and found that I liked it enough to keep it on here.
 
Old 01-05-2014, 11:50 AM   #7
DavidMcCann
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: London
Distribution: CentOS, Salix
Posts: 4,260

Rep: Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245
Your computer is faster than mine and has more RAM, and I don't have a graphics card. I can run KDE and Gnome, but they're a bit sluggish. If you have decent graphics acceleration, you might find them fine. But if you just fancy a full desktop, go for Xfce or Mate.

LXDE tends to be a trial when it comes to configuration. If the limited tools provided don't do what you want, then editing the file is more complicated than with Ice: poor layout and no instructions. It's also going to be going through major changes over the next few years, as they switch from GKT to Qt.

This is a nice survey, with links:
http://www.renewablepcs.com/about-li...-gnome-or-xfce
Looking at screen-shots and reading the official descriptions of their features can give you a good idea of what they're like.
 
Old 01-05-2014, 12:29 PM   #8
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: ...uncanny valley... infinity\1975; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US, Earth, end border$! ◣◢┌∩┐ Fe26-E,e...
Distribution: any GPL that works well on my cheapest; has been KDE or CLI but open... http://goo.gl/NqgqJx &c ;-)
Posts: 3,288
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 929Reputation: 929Reputation: 929Reputation: 929Reputation: 929Reputation: 929Reputation: 929Reputation: 929
KDE will do fine if you don't add too many bells and whistles I have 4GB of RAM so Attachment 14428
plus you can have many WMs...

Last edited by jamison20000e; 08-18-2014 at 01:52 PM.
 
Old 01-05-2014, 12:47 PM   #9
dolphin_oracle
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 335

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
@roky

that a big percentage difference but probably not a big difference in usage.

for comparison, I have an old sony notebook with an 900mhz amd duron processor. It chokes on xfce but runs reasonably well with icewm or fluxbox.

I have a run of posts of at antix.freeforums.org with htop memory/cpu comparisons of fresh desktop installs of xfce and mate. It might be useful to the o.p.

xfce - http://antix.freeforums.org/post31873.html#p31873
mate - http://antix.freeforums.org/post31882.html#p31882
 
Old 01-06-2014, 10:06 AM   #10
rubankumars
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2010
Location: india
Distribution: debian 8,trisquel 7, parabola gnu/linux-libre
Posts: 141

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 12
I have no separate graphics card.
 
Old 01-06-2014, 10:41 AM   #11
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: ...uncanny valley... infinity\1975; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US, Earth, end border$! ◣◢┌∩┐ Fe26-E,e...
Distribution: any GPL that works well on my cheapest; has been KDE or CLI but open... http://goo.gl/NqgqJx &c ;-)
Posts: 3,288
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 929Reputation: 929Reputation: 929Reputation: 929Reputation: 929Reputation: 929Reputation: 929Reputation: 929
Xfce, JWM or Openbox are ones I like to use on older boxes.
 
Old 01-06-2014, 11:19 AM   #12
rubankumars
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2010
Location: india
Distribution: debian 8,trisquel 7, parabola gnu/linux-libre
Posts: 141

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 12
I have one confusion plz clarify
"Gnome 3,KDE 4 are suitable for New systems.
For old systems, xfce,lxde,fluxbox,icewm are more suitable than Gnome 3 and Kde 4."
Are these above things true or not?


Also,I tried Gnome 3 and kde 4 in my debian wheezy.Gnome 3 goes into fallback mode only.Is there any way to change it?
KDE4 runs I haven't tried any kde apps yet.
But,i like using icewm and xfe and lightdm than gnome kde xfce lxde.
 
Old 01-06-2014, 11:22 AM   #13
dolphin_oracle
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 335

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
the statement is true, but xfce is a little heavier than lxde and the rest.
 
Old 01-06-2014, 11:31 AM   #14
DavidMcCann
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: London
Distribution: CentOS, Salix
Posts: 4,260

Rep: Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245Reputation: 1245
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubankumars View Post
I have one confusion plz clarify
"Gnome 3,KDE 4 are suitable for New systems.
For old systems, xfce,lxde,fluxbox,icewm are more suitable than Gnome 3 and Kde 4."
Are these above things true or not?
Yes.
Quote:
Also,I tried Gnome 3 and kde 4 in my debian wheezy.Gnome 3 goes into fallback mode only.Is there any way to change it?
No.
Quote:
But,i like using icewm and xfe and lightdm than gnome kde xfce lxde.
Then stay with it! Ice was the first GUI I even had on a computer, and I still like it.
 
Old 01-06-2014, 01:00 PM   #15
TroN-0074
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Location: Michigan USA
Distribution: OpenSUSE 13.2 64bit-Gnome on ASUS U52F
Posts: 1,444

Rep: Reputation: 340Reputation: 340Reputation: 340Reputation: 340
Hey!
Xfce,LXDE, Fluxbox, IceWM. Are not just for older computers. They happens to run fine on a older computer but there is people out there running these graphical interfaces on brand new computers. There are modern distros that are optimazed to work with Xfce. Take a look at Ubuntu Studio.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Fedora 17 GNOME, KDE, LXDE and Xfce beta: Last before the final LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 04-19-2012 06:11 AM
LXer: What is the difference between GNOME, KDE, XFCE, and LXDE? LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 08-06-2011 11:41 AM
[SOLVED] How would I swap window managers from KDE to Fluxbox or XFCE? Lanteran Slackware 2 06-09-2010 05:18 PM
xfce and .Xmodmap - difference from KDE and other window managers niels.horn Slackware 4 03-16-2009 06:23 AM
change window managers xfce to kde liuguobiao Linux - Newbie 3 12-22-2008 03:39 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:58 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration