Using 11.1 on my computers. Used for a very long time KDE and last KDE4.2 on my underpowered Pentium III and II. My motherboards do not see/use more than 768 respectively 512 M. I think it is time for me to buy a new motherboard ;( or to have a look at less memory hungry window manager. Does somebody have a comparison between the available managers? Are there known drawbacks for any of them? No flame war ;) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Sunday 10 May 2009 06:07:57 am Constant Brouerius van Nidek wrote:
Using 11.1 on my computers. Used for a very long time KDE and last KDE4.2 on my underpowered Pentium III and II. My motherboards do not see/use more than 768 respectively 512 M. I think it is time for me to buy a new motherboard ;( or to have a look at less memory hungry window manager. Does somebody have a comparison between the available managers? Are there known drawbacks for any of them? No flame war ;)
# free total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 1472004 659964 812040 0 72104 315088 -/+ buffers/cache: 272772 1199232 Swap: 2000052 0 2000052 The middle line output is what I look for memory usage 272772 KB used, when needed 1199232 KB can be used for other applications. Looking the: # ps -A -o uid | wc -l 115 tells that 115 processes are running. # ps -A -o uid | wc -l 48 tells that 48 belong to user 1000, including 3 console, dolphin and 2 kmail windows. When I started OpenOfice Calc to put "ps -A" data in tables to calculate sums the total usage was 339812 KB, with 73 MB belong to OpenOfficwe. Which is still well within your smallest RAM. What makes difference to you is not memory usage, but CPU usage. Modern desktop like KDE rely on certain functions that PIII can't provide and it will be used workaround that is slower, just as any software emulation of hardware capabilities. How they do that I don't know, but that is what makes big difference. Having Athlon XP 1600+ and Athlon 64 3400+ side by side, I can see big difference just with web browsing, not to mention rendering images in GIMP. Taking how cheap can be used computer it seems better option to think of hardware upgrade, but if you can't do much about it at the moment then you can try Xfce, ICEwm, WindowMaker, and similar. That will require a bit of your configuration, but it will not ask you CPU for things that it doesn't support. You have to keep in mind that system processes may still ask for better CPU, so don't expect essential speedup in all parts of the system. In my case that would be 115-48=67 processes. -- Regards, Rajko http://news.opensuse.org/category/people-of-opensuse/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Sunday 10 May 2009 09:44:06 am Rajko M. wrote: I made copy-paste mistake.
# ps -A -o uid | wc -l
The command I used was not above, but: # ps -A -o uid | grep 1000 | wc -l which would give below number.
48 tells that 48 belong to user 1000, including 3 console, dolphin and 2 kmail windows.
There is better way to list user only processes, but I didn't want to read man page again :-) -- Regards, Rajko http://news.opensuse.org/category/people-of-opensuse/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
On Sunday 10 May 2009 22:19:09 Rajko M. wrote:
On Sunday 10 May 2009 09:44:06 am Rajko M. wrote:
Thanks a lot for the clear explanation. Had already the idea that my CPU was the cause my slow system. This problem became worse with every new Suse version and I wonder if I am still able to work with my old system with the coming versions ;). -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org
participants (2)
-
Constant Brouerius van Nidek -
Rajko M.