Re: KDE: Speed issues
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001 19:57:50 +0100 (CET)
Hanno Mueller <kontakt@hanno.de> wrote:
Hi:
All I can offer is anecdotal evidence, but I use KDE 1.x at work and KDE 2.1 at home (after trying 2.0 for a few weeks) -- and I believe that 2.1 may take a bit longer to initialize than earlier releases, but that it actually responds a bit faster after it is up and running than the earlier releases. This is all on fairly old 586 desktop hardware (Intel, AMD and Cyrix).
Later,
Colin
> Hi,
>
>
> I am running KDE as my primary work environment on an outdated laptop with
> a Pentium MMX 233 and 160 MB Ram. Because it is a laptop, its components
> are slower than desktop PC components.
>
> The machine runs Debian testing packages and KDE built for potato, using
> the current XFree 3.x server from testing.
>
> What I was wondering about: Is it just me or is KDE getting slower with
> recent builds? My machine is of course slow by todays standards to begin
> with, but it has more than enough RAM to cope with most heavy
> applications.
>
> Problem is: I cannot provide objective numbers, only anecdotical
> reference.
>
> When I started using KDE on with 2.0, it did not feel as slow as today.
> Logging on the environment and starting applications appears to be much
> slower than it used to.
>
> Can anyone confirm this?
>
>
> Also, there is this guy on Slashdot who keeps posting the following
> whenever KDE is mentioned:
>
> Optimizing the source build (Score:5, Informative)
> by darial on Monday February 26, @08:52PM EST (#93)
> (User #177051 Info)
>
> For those who build KDE from source, and ESPECIALLY the
> pacakagers at big distros, consider strongly doing the
> folowing:
>
> set the -no-g++-exceptions flag when building qt
>
> and set the folowing options for all qt and kde:
> -03
> -mpentiumpro (or -march=pentiumpro for ppro only objs)
>
> the exceptions optimization literally reduces the size of
> everyting related to qt by several megs a piece with no
> detriemntal effects. -03 is important because it
> turns on inlining, which is a big win for C++ code with
> lots of tiny functions. And optimizing for modern chips should
> be standard for anyone. These changes sped up my KDE load time
> by 50%, and made the whole thing feel much "snappier" and
> smoother. Don't let KDE2 get a rep for slowness just because
> you used lousy compiler options. (and yes, I posted something
> similar to the kde2.0 article, but I'm going to repeat it until
> the packagers get it right)
>
> Is he right? Could I help my machine by doing own builds for some specific
> packages? Which ones? (I doubt that -mpentiumpro will help me on my
> Pentium MMX, though.)
>
>
> Greetings,
>
> Hanno
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kde-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
Reply to: