Running GNOME with 128 MB RAM - Painfully slow?
in [Debian]
|
Prev: Problems since upgrading to Squeeze
Next: NOW: Stay away from lshw! WAS: Retrieve hardware and modules info..
From: francis southern on 5 Apr 2010 02:10 You could also try Tiny Core Linux. http://www.tinycorelinux.com/ I haven't used it much myself, but I've heard it described as "the next Damn Small Linux". On 5 April 2010 00:20, Greg Madden <gomadtroll(a)acsalaska.net> wrote: > On Sunday 04 April 2010 08:28:53 pm Tech Geek wrote: >> >You can try adding swap but I doubt it will help much as the disk is so >> > old >> >> and slow >> The hard drive is quite recent and supports up to UDMA2 speeds although I >> too think that adding swap space won't make a difference. >> >> >Adding another 128MB or 256MB of memory would probably help the most with >> >> that system >> Unfortunately there is no option to upgrade the memory on the system. Also >> I forgot to mention that it is a 800 MHz system: >> debian:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo >> processor : 0 >> vendor_id : Vortex86 SoC >> cpu family : 5 >> model : 2 >> model name : 05/02 >> stepping : 2 >> cpu MHz : 800.041 >> fdiv_bug : no >> hlt_bug : no >> f00f_bug : no >> coma_bug : no >> fpu : yes >> fpu_exception : yes >> cpuid level : 1 >> wp : yes >> flags : fpu tsc cx8 >> bogomips : 1600.08 >> clflush size : 32 >> cache_alignment : 32 >> address sizes : 32 bits physical, 32 bits virtual >> power management: >> >> Based on my specs (800 MHz CPU and 128 MB RAM) and [1], I still should be >> able to operate GNOME and some of the apps. However even opening gedit >> brings the system to crawl which is so surprising. I will add some swap and >> see if that makes a difference although I am not counting on it based on my >> past expereince. >> >> [1] http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/2.0/#performance > > XFCE, Fluxbox, et. al. are a better way to do a gui system with specs like that > Don't install anything with 'Gnome' in the package name, or "K/KDE'. Apps that > use GTK libraries without the Gnome stuff maybe. > > 'Damn Small Linux' does minimal installs., which are hard to duplicate with more > mainstream distro's. > -- > Peace > > Greg Madden > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian..org > Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201004042120.07318.gomadtroll(a)acsalaska.net > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/u2p77f417a21004042300o93d692cx184e90021a91e3f8(a)mail.gmail.com
From: Charlie on 5 Apr 2010 02:40 On Mon, 5 Apr 2010 01:00:01 -0500 francis southern <francis.southern(a)gmail.com> shared this with us all: >You could also try Tiny Core Linux. http://www.tinycorelinux.com/ >I haven't used it much myself, but I've heard it described as "the >next Damn Small Linux". I use lenny with fluxbox on a Toshiba 32MB RAM 10 GB hard drive celeron 650 CPU and it is slow, good for only very simple low resource tasks with 250MB swap Hope that helps. Charlie -- Registered Linux User:- 329524 ...................................................... Men are born to succeed, not to fail. .............................Henry David Thoreau ...................................................... Debian GNU/Linux - just the best way to create magic -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100405162610.3410114f(a)tao
From: Joseph Lenox on 5 Apr 2010 02:40 On 4/4/2010 11:17 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > You can try adding swap but I doubt it will help much as the disk is so old > and slow. Adding another 128MB or 256MB of memory would probably help the > most with that system, but given that it has a sub 200MHz 486 class > processor, you really need a more modern system if you want decent GUI > performance with modern GUI apps like FireFox, ThunderBird, Opera, etc. > > I haven't tried running a full Linux GUI desktop on really old x86 hardware, > but my gut instinct tells me you'd really need at _minimum_ a 200-300Mhz P6 > class machine (anything Pentium Pro or later but no cacheless Celerons) with > at least 256MB RAM, preferably 384MB or more. A 200MHz Pentium Pro has > about 4 times the integer throughput and 6 times the floating point > throughput of a 133MHz 486 clone such as the AMD, Cyrix, or TI chips. And a > 200MHz PPro isn't going to be super responsive with a modern Linux GUI > desktop either, though it wouldn't be as frustrating as your 486 class system. > > If you can, get a newer system. If that's not a possibility, try to get > more memory for this one. Oh, and with only 128MB and no swap, I'd > definitely add some swap, at least 256MB, just to stave off the OOM killer. > You can find P3 boxes really, really cheap (basically what it costs to ship) these days; and the RAM for those isn't an arm+leg yet. Depending on the board, you may still find ISA slots (if that's something you must have). --Joseph Lenox -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4BB980FA.8040004(a)gmail.com
From: Freeman on 5 Apr 2010 02:50 On Sun, Apr 04, 2010 at 08:33:05PM -0700, Tech Geek wrote: > So I have a very low end system which has 128 MB of RAM and a 486 based x86 > processor. After installing GNOME on Lenny, as soon as I launch firefox, > opera or any other relatively intensive application the system comes to a > crawl and becomes slow and sluggish. The system load increase up tp 5, the > CPU usage also shoots up to 25% and things become painfully slow to operate > i.e. become less responsive. > > Is there some kind of min. system requirements for running GNOME? Are there > any tricks to make the system more responsive? Would adding swap help? Right > now my system does not have any swap partition. > > Anybody's input who has expereince running GNOME on a low end system like > this would be helpful. > If the idea is to see what is possible, OK. But if this is to be a functional computer doing some work, I would suggest booting into the console. Screen will give your multiple work areas, elinks is a great browser, pdmenu reassembles the debian menu items that will work in cli, mutt is the best email client anyway, wicd-curses is great, snownews, mplayer-no-gui, cdcd, mc, iptraff, saidar, ethstatus, terminus fonts, . . .. The Debian console is a pretty nice place. There are some programs for framebuffer graphics too. Then you can put your system up against the wall from the console when you feel like it. :-) -- Kind Regards, Freeman http://bugs.debian.org/release-critical/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100405064303.GA7326(a)Europa.office
From: Rob Owens on 5 Apr 2010 08:50 On Sun, Apr 04, 2010 at 08:33:05PM -0700, Tech Geek wrote: > So I have a very low end system which has 128 MB of RAM and a 486 based x86 > processor. After installing GNOME on Lenny, as soon as I launch firefox, > opera or any other relatively intensive application the system comes to a > crawl and becomes slow and sluggish. The system load increase up tp 5, the > CPU usage also shoots up to 25% and things become painfully slow to operate > i.e. become less responsive. > > Is there some kind of min. system requirements for running GNOME? Are there > any tricks to make the system more responsive? Would adding swap help? Right > now my system does not have any swap partition. > > Anybody's input who has expereince running GNOME on a low end system like > this would be helpful. > I've run GNOME on a P3 with 256 MB, and it was bearable. But these days when I set up a low-end system like that, I run Fluxbox or LXDE. They both give a great speed improvement over GNOME. Generally I use Fluxbox for myself, and recommend LXDE for others. The reason is that LXDE has some of the "right-click" functionality that most mainstream users have come to expect, while Fluxbox does not (but I like Fluxbox better for some more geeky reasons). Both of these systems use somewhere around 50MB of RAM before loading any apps. The window managers that others have mentioned in this thread are good as well. But I think LXDE will be easier for most people. It also comes with a lot of lightweight apps by default, so you don't have to go searching for suggestions on the internet. -Rob -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100405125138.GA11413(a)aurora.owens.net
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 Prev: Problems since upgrading to Squeeze Next: NOW: Stay away from lshw! WAS: Retrieve hardware and modules info.. |