New to q4os

rmcellig · 2018-02-12 11:37

I installed q4os last week and replaced it with KDE neon. I am going to install it again to another partiion and give another go. I'm glad to finally be on this forum to chat with other q4os users. I currently have Debian LXQT/LXDE in one partition and like I said before kde neon in the other partition. I think I will replace Debian with q4os and also read your FAQ guide.

Dai_trying · 2018-02-12 14:15

Welcome to the forum, and the FAQ's are a good place to start. You might also find some of the previous posts useful when setting your system up.

I use Debian also on other partitions and I like light distributions (like you appear to with LXQT and LXDE) I don't run KDE on any other partitions (other than Q4OS) as I'm not really keen on all the bells and whistles that just suck up resources, but I do understand why it is so popular and many users seem to really like it. I hope you enjoy using Q4OS

crosscourt · 2018-02-12 23:24

The funny part about it is my KDE distro uses 407mbs at GUI, my XFCE distro uses 300 and Q4OS uses 270mbs so the difference isnt that large. KDE runs with good speed and you can turn off unneeded apps at startup and desktop effects if you want to stay lean and mean. With the change to 64bit things are much closer than most users realize but it all depends on the distro and what hardware your using.

Dai_trying · 2018-02-12 23:50

yes I agree KDE is not quite the resource eater it used to be, but I do prefer to keep my resources available for when I need them and try to keep OS basics down to a minimum.

crosscourt · 2018-02-13 00:08

I find my KDE 5 install is just as fast and snappy as TDE but it depends again on which distro and what apps you use. If you compare a lean install of both TDE and KDE they dont perform that differently and some distros have what are referred to as KDE-mini installs, minimalist KDE installs that perform very well.

I run XFCE with Q4OS as well and its performance is very good even with older hardware, but even the KDE-mini works well with older hardware.

Last edited by crosscourt (2018-02-13 00:12)

q4osteam · 2018-02-13 09:28

crosscourt wrote:

The funny part about it is my KDE distro uses 407mbs at GUI, my XFCE distro uses 300 and Q4OS uses 270mbs ...

How exactly did you get these values, is it reproducible ? TDE in Q4OS 64bit basic installation shouldn't take more than 200MB RAM, typically 190MB.

crosscourt · 2018-02-13 21:07

Yes its reproducible as Q4OS 2.4 64bit uses around 270mbs, Mageia 6 KDE at GUI runs around 400-410mbs, and MX Linux 17 runs around 280-300mbs.

I test distros on a regular basis and those values were produced after a normal install and reboot using Htop at the GUI desktop screen(Ksysguard with Mageia 6 actually showed lower memory usage than Htop but very close). Nothing fancy and I also turn off any startup apps I dont need.

I havent seen 190mbs from Q4OS since the 32bit 1.8.8 version. I run very simple minimalist installs with no extras and effects.

q4osteam · 2018-02-13 22:34

@crosscourt
Please post an exact procedure to reproduce your tests and values you stated above - hardware specification, and step by step procedure from the fresh installation to the 'htop' launch. We will go over the procedure to reproduce and to confirm memory usage you quoted:

crosscourt wrote:

The funny part about it is my KDE distro uses 407mbs at GUI, my XFCE distro uses 300 and Q4OS uses 270mbs so the difference isnt that large.

crosscourt wrote:

Yes its reproducible as Q4OS 2.4 64bit uses around 270mbs, Mageia 6 KDE at GUI runs around 400-410mbs, and MX Linux 17 runs around 280-300mbs.
I test distros on a regular basis and those values were produced after a normal install and reboot using Htop at the GUI desktop screen(Ksysguard with Mageia 6 actually showed lower memory usage than Htop but very close). Nothing fancy and I also turn off any startup apps I dont need.
I havent seen 190mbs from Q4OS since the 32bit 1.8.8 version. I run very simple minimalist installs with no extras and effects.

crosscourt wrote:

I find my KDE 5 install is just as fast and snappy as TDE but it depends again on which distro and what apps you use. If you compare a lean install of both TDE and KDE they dont perform that differently and some distros have what are referred to as KDE-mini installs, minimalist KDE installs that perform very well.

Dai_trying · 2018-02-13 22:57

One thing I have noticed regarding memory usage, I just tested two virtual machines that I use for testing and found the following results:

VM1 Fresh install Pure profile look switcher installed and Debonaire theme running. top reports 166 Mb
VM2 Fresh install Pure profile L.A.M.P server installed and running . top reports 239 Mb

I also tested my desktop (after rebooting it to clear memory) and found :-

Desktop system Pure profile Quite a lot of various software installed as I use it for pretty much everything. top reports 238 Mb

With all these systems top also reported buffers/cache memory used separately and this would give figures closer to what is being reported by CC and htop, and coincidentally My conky reports the memory figures the same as htop with buffers/cache included which could be where the memory usage differential is occurring.

crosscourt · 2018-02-13 23:06

There is no exact procedure as you put it. I use the same system Dell Optiplex 7010 MT with 8gb ram, 500gb hard drive I5 3.4ghz, Intel IGP.

Its a standard full desktop install such as you would do to install the Q4OS 2.4 for yourself at home, with all recent updates. I dont install anything additional as far as apps and everything is default as installed. Once thats accomplished I reboot and use Htop only to check memory usage.

The testing procedure I use for other sites is very different but the numbers I quoted you for all those distros was from a standard install any person would do with a livecd. Mageia 6 is the only distro of the three that had any apps turned off at startup but thats typically touchpad and bluetooth, thats it.

Given differences with system configurations, that probably accounts for the difference you see as an issue. 70mb is well within the range of difference but my point is even with your number of 200mb your only 80-100mb lower than MX Linux 17 XFCE, also, Debian 9 based.

q4osteam · 2018-02-14 00:06

Dai_trying wrote:

... top also reported buffers/cache memory used separately and this would give figures closer to what is being reported by CC and htop, and coincidentally My conky reports the memory figures the same as htop with buffers/cache included which could be where the memory usage differential is occurring.

Htop in its default configuration clearly reports single numerical value of memory usage, see the picture below. This value represents direct memory usage and it doesn't include cache and buffers. We guess, it's the value quoted by crosscourt. Right crosscourt ?

q4osteam · 2018-02-15 09:03

crosscourt wrote:

There is no exact procedure as you put it. I use the same system Dell Optiplex 7010 MT with 8gb ram, 500gb hard drive I5 3.4ghz, Intel IGP.
Its a standard full desktop install such as you would do to install the Q4OS 2.4 for yourself at home, with all recent updates. I dont install anything additional as far as apps and everything is default as installed. Once thats accomplished I reboot and use Htop only to check memory usage.

q4osteam wrote:

Htop in its default configuration clearly reports single numerical value of memory usage, see the picture below. This value represents direct memory usage and it doesn't include cache and buffers. We guess, it's the value quoted by crosscourt. Right crosscourt ?

@crosscourt
Would you please reply to our question from the previous post, see above, did you quote these values from htop ? We are interested in reproducing and confirming results of your tests (especially for Q4OS), as it could have quite significant impacts..

So, are you willing to cooperate a bit ?

OldCodger · 2018-02-16 11:48

Regarding storage usage figures, here are mine for comparison.
All readings taken a few minutes after boot on idle system with HTOP.

Production system running 2.4 with Trinity Classic menu + theme/icons - 187Mb
Backup production system 2.4 with Trinity Classic menu + theme/icons - 185Mb
Test system running 2.4 with Debonaire theme/Classic menu + Oxygen icons - 226Mb
Dev system running 3.1 with Debonaire theme/Classic menu + PaperQ4OS icons - 252Mb

q4osteam · 2018-02-16 12:29

@OldCodger
Yes, quite expected values. Memory usage of the fresh 64-bit Scorpion 2.4 system with the complete "Full profile" installed shouldn't exceed 200MB. The typical memory consumption should be around 160-180MB.

Keep in mind, Debonaire theme and Q4OS 3.1 Centaurus are still in development, they will get some more optimizations before become productive. We are going to perform some detailed and easily reproducible testing of Scorpion memory usage and we will publish it soon.

Unfortunately, we are not able to confirm the values quoted by crosscourt at the moment, as we miss more detailed info. We would need to know more exact info and methodology used by crosscourt for his testing.

Dai_trying · 2018-02-16 16:37

As this post seems to have gone a little "off topic" I have created a new topic of Scorpion memory usage with some findings of my personal tests.

q4osteam · 2018-02-16 16:39

Dai_trying wrote:

As this post seems to have gone a little "off topic" I have created a new topic of Scorpion memory usage with some findings of my personal tests.

Yes, good idea, let's move to the new topic

martingail · 2018-03-09 10:49

Hi there! I am newbie from UK, and provide the SPSS tutor for the academic help.

Q4OS Forum

#1 2018-02-12 11:37

New to q4os

#2 2018-02-12 14:15

Re: New to q4os

#3 2018-02-12 23:24

Re: New to q4os

#4 2018-02-12 23:50

Re: New to q4os

#5 2018-02-13 00:08

Re: New to q4os

#6 2018-02-13 09:28

Re: New to q4os

#7 2018-02-13 21:07

Re: New to q4os

#8 2018-02-13 22:34

Re: New to q4os

#9 2018-02-13 22:57

Re: New to q4os

#10 2018-02-13 23:06

Re: New to q4os

#11 2018-02-14 00:06

Re: New to q4os

#12 2018-02-15 09:03

Re: New to q4os

#13 2018-02-16 11:48

Re: New to q4os

#14 2018-02-16 12:29

Re: New to q4os

#15 2018-02-16 16:37

Re: New to q4os

#16 2018-02-16 16:39

Re: New to q4os

#17 2018-03-09 10:49

Re: New to q4os

Board footer