On Wednesday 24 February 2021, J Leslie Turriff wrote:
On 2021-02-23 14:31:14 Patrick Shanahan wrote:
|* Per Jessen
[02-23-21 13:14]: |> mauro wrote: |> > through our four KDE repos |> > it's even nicer than bfore, |> > htop says cpu usage < 5%, RAM 1,2GB with 5 open programs, on a machine |> > 10+yrs old |> > |> > I always wonder why there are people who use a different DE (among |> > those who do use a DE) and which be their reasons...I couldn't think |> > of anything better, I only miss sometimes the mouse wheel scrolling |> > speed setting, I'm looking forward for it to be re-implemented |> > |> > So, why don't you use KDE? And why do you use (not-KDE)? |> |> On minimum hardware, other more frugal DEs perform better. I don't |> often have the reason, but I have used LXDE and icewm in the past. |> |> Otherwise I am also a committed KDE user, the entire office. | |I read a study sometime in the last six months that commented KDE was |actually quite frugal with system resources, even more so than ice and |xfce. but it does seem hard to believe. | |fwiw: I run KDE/Plasma w/o swap for about 10 years. Maybe that study was looking at KDE3.
Leslie -- openSUSE Leap 15.2 x86_64
I remember seeing an article by Jason Evangelho at forbs.com which was focused on the latest KDE Plasma: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2019/10/23/bold-prediction-kde-w... The article concentrated on RAM usage, so it's really only one aspect of "frugal". I don't think it looked at CPU consumption, number of active threads/process, GPU usage, disk consumed by the install, response time, or energy consumption. Cheers, Michael