On Wednesday 26 February 2003 12:13 pm, flacycads wrote:
> If you are referring to me, my /etc/hosts file is correct (not empty), and
> my hard drives are tweaked with hdparm, and have been since I started Linux
> about 9 months ago. I also only run the services I actually need, and
> compile lean as possible kernels. However, I know I could use more ram on
> these machines, and that would help the performance. I also use only the
> best ram, and have been a serious overclocker at times, and know the ins
> and outs of that, although at present I'm not overclocking while I'm
> trying to really learn about my Linux systems.
>
> I've made a pretty serious effort to tune my Mandrake install, and read
> everything I could find on the subject, but of course I'm all ears for any
> advice anyone wants to offer, and it will certainly be appreciated. I can
> use all the knowledge I can get, and this great expert list has really
> helped me tremendously.
>
> I came from a Mac/windows background, and have many years experience
> tweaking them for maximun performance. BTW, someone mentioned windows won't
> use all the memory. That's not exactly correct- you can edit the System.ini
> file to force windows to use all available ram before using the swap file.
> This works really well for those with a lot of ram. You can also make edits
> to control the loading and unloading of .dlls, among many other settings
> edits that affect performance. I only mention this because I've been trying
> to figure out if there are similar modifications in Linux- there doesn't
> seem to be much written about this- at least I haven't run across much. And
> of course I still have a lot to learn about the /etc/filexxxx possiblities.
>
> My main concern is not how fast an OS boots, or how fast applications load
> into ram, it's how good the response/performance is afterwards. Which is,
> of course, where lots of ram and a fast cpu works wonders, with Linux or
> windows.
>
> Robert Crawford
>
> On Wednesday 26 February 2003 02:11 pm, et wrote:
> > On Wednesday 26 February 2003 02:39 am, civileme wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 25 February 2003 09:17 pm, Jack Coates wrote:
> > > > Not to turn it into a WM flamewar, but are you using KDE or GNOME?
> > > > Either fullblown environment can make the experience a lot slower in
> > > > my experience.
> > > >
> > > > It's also possible and fun to throw Linux's performance down the
> > > > stairs in ways that Windows simply won't do, such as pixmapped themes
> > > > and running graphic programs in the root-window. Go easy on the
> > > > eye-candy, get faster response.
> > > >
> > > > Last but not least, there are definitely issues with XFree86 that
> > > > won't be going away. For one thing, X is a user space program and the
> > > > Win32 GDI is kernel space, ring 0, ever since NT 4.0. This is
> > > > changing with DRI, but at the same cost of decreased stability which
> > > > plagues NT video. Also, X's video card support tends to be a bit
> > > > flaky in my experience, which is to say it's a crap-shoot if running
> > > > a 3d program is going to produce software rendering, hardware
> > > > rendering, static across the top 3rd of my screen, or a video card
> > > > lockup (all of these have happened this week with a Voodoo3 and an
> > > > i815). I don't think that XFree86 gets the same sort of attention
> > > > that Windows drivers get, since driver debugging that goes past the
> > > > point of "it works on the primary developer's machine" is not very
> > > > fun.
> > > >
> > > > dos centavos,
> > > > Jack
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 2003-02-25 at 21:36, flacycads wrote:
> > > > > OK- you're correct- I don't speak for everyone, and my choice of
> > > > > words was unfortunate. Please accept my apology.
> > > > >
> > > > > However, my experience on several dual boot boxes with different
> > > > > versions of windows and Linux has always been that overall computer
> > > > > performance is significantly better when booted to windows. I'm
> > > > > sorry, but that's what happens- there's no question about it. Of
> > > > > course I do have any windows installation I run highly tweaked and
> > > > > tuned to perfection( as good as is possible), and perhaps I can
> > > > > tweak my Linux installs a little more than I presently have.
> > > > >
> > > > > Robert Crawford
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tuesday 25 February 2003 07:26 pm, et wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday 25 February 2003 05:01 pm, Joe Braddock wrote:
> > > > > > > -------Original Message-------
> > > > > > > From: flacycads <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > > Sent: 02/25/03 05:10 PM
> > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [expert] Mandrake Out of Control?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > <snip>
> > > > > > > Anyone who dual boots with windows on the same hardware knows
> > > > > > > that windows
> > > > >
> > > > > ...
> > >
> > > And don't forget the obvious
> > >
> > > Office is like 95% loaded if you use windows... compare that to loading
> > > ALL of OpenOffice.
> > >
> > > So if you are comparing Windows performance in this area, try opening
> > > OpenOffice on Desktop 2 and just ticking it on the taskbar,
> > >
> > > Same for Konqueror/Mozilla/Phoenix/Opera vs MSIE
> > >
> > > That is not to say there are not slower areas in linux. Video drivers
> > > are a problem (strange, Windows doesn't write video drivers), and of
> > > course the overhead in maintaining decent security is there by design
> > > in linux.
> > >
> > > My own results, on my own equipment, do not support your results, but
> > > then I have machines with a LOT of memory which linux uses and Windows
> > > does not.
> > >
> > > Civileme
> >
> > I bet your network is correctly setup and tweaked, and his /etc/host file
> > is empty too
even if you set windows to use all of ram before dipping into swap, big deal.
With 256M available here is what I have
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tester]$ free
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 256748 246884 9864 0 19596 95268
-/+ buffers/cache: 132020 124728
Swap: 401584 203788 197796
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tester]$
That looks like 4% free
but look about half is buffers/cache.
Windows doesn't do that, no how no way. Windows uses up memory when it has
memory leaks. In linux, unused memory above a certain level is just wasted
memory that could be employed to make the system run faster.
It has been a while since I tested windows, but I just happened to have
someone's machine to work on today, XP and Mandrake 9.1Beta3....
I can run MS Office and three internet windows and download a 400K file on XP
and it becomes noticeably sluggish on Xp and won't load Pool of Radiance RoMD
in less than 4 minutes. (yes I have DSL 240 up and 320 down)
I can run OpenOffice and 12 internet windows and download a 650Mb file to keep
things busy on linux and RoMD still loads in about 2 minutes under WineX
It is an Athlon XP 1700 UNDERCLOCKED to 1210MHz with a 256M PC133 SDRAM and a
40 G Maxtor and a pedestrian CDRW (4x2x24).. (Yep the underclocking is
necessary cause the board won't run right on Win or linux at higher speeds...
An XP should never have been put on this board--that was the diagnostic that
made it show up here--my recommendation is to put in a T-bird CPU or replace
the motherboard)
Civileme
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
