[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [OT] Why does X need so much CPU power?



On Mon, 01 Sep 2003, Michael Heironimus wrote:
> X usually doesn't need much CPU power, as long as you have a reasonably
> well-supported video card. Your problem is that you're running GNOME and
> KDE, which are huge, bloated, and slow (and I'm being kind in saying
> that). They have been for a long time, since before their first 1.0
> releases, and new versions seem to have been bloating even faster than
> new releases of Windows have been.

I'm probably repeating yet-another-X-fallacy (such as the infamous 
`X is slow because it uses client/server architecture):

Under the pre-2.6 vanilla Linux kernels, multitasking was orientated
more towards servers - perhaps one process would be a little slow, but 
things would keep chugging along.

With the low latency patches to 2.4 and the new code in 2.6, desktop 
machines are supposed to be more responsive, making X seem quicker.

Again, please take the above with a grain of salt - I've heard it
repeated several times, but I have never seen benchmarks to prove that 
latency is an issue.

~ Jesse Meyer

[ Happily using fluxbox and liking X windows - working fine for me with 
1 server and client programs on 2 machines. ]

-- 
Nifty linux app:                          
  bitlbee   : use your favorite IRC client to interface with aim, icq, msn
              messenger and yim (www.lintux.cx/bitlbee.html)
   ====  icq: 34583382    msn: dasunt@hotmail.com    yim: tsunad  ====

Attachment: pgpgIA0YflYkh.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: