Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

Vamp898 · 2009-12-13 23:46:17

http://qt.nokia.com/about/news/nokia-releases-qt-4.6

Im telling about the part which tells "More horsepower"

Does anyone already tried Qt 4.6 and felt the speed improvement

flamelab · 2009-12-14 00:35:29

It is snappier, indeed. You can see it on KDE 4.4 (alpha/beta for now).

Skripka · 2009-12-14 01:36:56

Dammit. I need my production box to be more stable...but Qt4.6 and KDE4.4 is 2 or 3 months away....grrrrr.

Vamp898 · 2009-12-14 07:26:47

Why is Qt not with KDE 4.3.4? it works just fine with other distros

nfm · 2009-12-14 08:16:10

No speed improvements here, KDE 4.4b1 is still slow as hell.

Vamp898 · 2009-12-14 08:22:03

that amazes me. Im using KDE 4.3.4 and its really fast and needs only about 300mb of memory. I dont know if its beceause my settings or KDE but here KDE runs fast. But im wondering if it goes faster with Qt 4.6

nfm · 2009-12-14 08:43:32

Vamp898 wrote:

that amazes me. Im using KDE 4.3.4 and its really fast and needs only about 300mb of memory. I dont know if its beceause my settings or KDE but here KDE runs fast. But im wondering if it goes faster with Qt 4.6

It depends what you call fast, 300Mb for DE is ridiculous. I only installed kde-base and kde theme and I'm getting about 160Mb after a boot on x86_64, way too much if you would ask me. GTK apps run much snappier within KDE. I just prefer wine and good Win32 apps such as foobar2000. A fast DE is XP and Win32 API. Most of FOSS graphical based app are slow and unoptimized, partly do to crappy mesa3d state and Xorg's exa still being in stone age.

Last edited by nfm (2009-12-14 08:44:17)

guzz46 · 2009-12-14 09:24:47

It depends what you call fast, 300Mb for DE is ridiculous. I only installed kde-base and kde theme and I'm getting about 160Mb after a boot on x86_64, way too much if you would ask me. GTK apps run much snappier within KDE. I just prefer wine and good Win32 apps such as foobar2000. A fast DE is XP and Win32 API. Most of FOSS graphical based app are slow and unoptimized, partly do to crappy mesa3d state and Xorg's exa still being in stone age

I have to say it has been the opposite for me, I have had xp and xfce installed on the same machine and found xfce to be much faster, now I have switched to kde 4.3 and windows 7 and though kde is slower than xfce it is still much faster than windows 7, from grub to desktop kde takes 35 seconds everytime, where windows 7 takes anywhere from 50 seconds to 1:20 and that is with as many windows services turned off as possible, and the speed of apps is the same, chrome on kde takes 2 seconds to open from cold, on windows 7 it takes at least twice as long.

If you want a fast music player goggles music manager is hard to beat or mpd with qmpdclient depending on your needs.
Plus 160mb after boot for a full desktop environment is pretty good if you ask me considering my (now getting old) nokia n82 cell phone comes with 128mb of ram, if you are concerned about memory usage switching to i686 would save you some memory, also preload can speed up app launching

flamelab · 2009-12-14 12:06:23

nfm wrote:

No speed improvements here, KDE 4.4b1 is still slow as hell.

That's your opinion. On a netbook I saw yesterday and on my desktop, it is too fast and responsive.

Adriano ML · 2009-12-14 15:12:37

KDE 4.3 is butter smooth on my 1GB Athlon 64 939, geforce 7600GS. Be it with or without kwin composition. My aton with GMA 950 fares really well too.

Can't wait for QT 4.6 and KDE 4.4

quarkup · 2009-12-14 23:04:33

im using 220m ram on the full kde4.3.4 environment, using compositing and widgets. and the bespin theme

its a 5-year old laptop
pentium-m 1.7GHz
nvidia geforce go 6800 (256Mb DDR)
2Gb ram

both kde and qt are very fast for all applications.. although its a old cpu, faster would be great.

flamelab wrote:

nfm wrote:
No speed improvements here, KDE 4.4b1 is still slow as hell.
That's your opinion. On a netbook I saw yesterday and on my desktop, it is too fast and responsive.

how can it bee too fast ??

Last edited by quarkup (2009-12-14 23:13:17)

Vamp898 · 2009-12-15 07:01:15

im looking forward to see Qt 4.6 soon here in Archlinux, dont know why its not updated yet

marb · 2009-12-15 07:27:53

nfm wrote:

Vamp898 wrote:
that amazes me. Im using KDE 4.3.4 and its really fast and needs only about 300mb of memory. I dont know if its beceause my settings or KDE but here KDE runs fast. But im wondering if it goes faster with Qt 4.6
It depends what you call fast, 300Mb for DE is ridiculous. I only installed kde-base and kde theme and I'm getting about 160Mb after a boot on x86_64, way too much if you would ask me. GTK apps run much snappier within KDE. I just prefer wine and good Win32 apps such as foobar2000. A fast DE is XP and Win32 API. Most of FOSS graphical based app are slow and unoptimized, partly do to crappy mesa3d state and Xorg's exa still being in stone age.

I don't understand the approach of making everything to use as low memory as possible. Why system and DE have to use 50MB of RAM when there is another 4k lying there and do nothing. For me, if it make it faster/better it can eat half of RAM at start, but if another app will need memory, it should gave it back.

Vamp898 · 2009-12-15 07:33:03

Clearly answer. Apps that uses more RAM are slower in there nature, especially when you have a Notebook Harddisk with 5200rpm beceause something have to put all the stuff into the Memory and move it around when its into the memory. And moving 1GB takes longer than moveing 400mb

Than you have less memory for applications. For example when KDE would need 1GB like Vista and you have 4GB of Memory. You can give you´re Virtual Machines about 1999mb of memory. when KDE just uses 400mb you can give your Virtual Machine about 2499mb what especially for Windows VMs is a great +^^

Last edited by Vamp898 (2009-12-15 07:33:43)

flamelab · 2009-12-15 11:35:45

quarkup wrote:

im using 220m ram on the full kde4.3.4 environment, using compositing and widgets. and the bespin theme
its a 5-year old laptop
pentium-m 1.7GHz
nvidia geforce go 6800 (256Mb DDR)
2Gb ram
both kde and qt are very fast for all applications.. although its a old cpu, faster would be great.

flamelab wrote:
nfm wrote:
No speed improvements here, KDE 4.4b1 is still slow as hell.
That's your opinion. On a netbook I saw yesterday and on my desktop, it is too fast and responsive.
how can it bee too fast ??

Because it was faster than I expected, regarding the fact that the gfx card on the netbook isn't that good.

Vamp898 wrote:

im looking forward to see Qt 4.6 soon here in Archlinux, dont know why its not updated yet

Because it breaks KDE 4.3.

Last edited by flamelab (2009-12-15 11:37:44)

Vamp898 · 2009-12-15 13:17:37

I used Qt 4.6 with KDE 4.3.4 in Gentoo without any problems Ö_Ö

ah sorry KDE 4.3.4 have to be compiled against Qt 4.6 on Gentoo it updated first to Qt 4.6, than updated to KDE 4.3.4

but i think it will be some time until KDE 4.4.0 and a recompile of 4.3.4 against Qt 4.6 does not need this long^^

Last edited by Vamp898 (2009-12-15 13:25:44)

Babets · 2009-12-15 13:29:57

Vamp898 wrote:

but i think it will be some time until KDE 4.4.0 and a recompile of 4.3.4 against Qt 4.6 does not need this long^^

There's already a thread in the ml
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/ … 14504.html

Pierre · 2009-12-15 13:33:29

Try setting e.g. Terminus font in Konsole on KDE 4.3.4 using Qt-4.6. That's some of the reasons we cannot pur Qt-4.6 into extra or testing.

Vamp898 · 2009-12-15 13:36:49

Pierre wrote:

Try setting e.g. Terminus font in Konsole on KDE 4.3.4 using Qt-4.6. That's some of the reasons we cannot pur Qt-4.6 into extra or testing.

Terminus? never used but im 100% for sure that im going to try it out^^

did you compiled KDE against Qt 4.6 or did you just bumped Qt 4.6?

Last edited by Vamp898 (2009-12-15 13:38:36)

Pierre · 2009-12-15 13:52:08

There should be no difference. (I just bumped Qt)

Vamp898 · 2009-12-15 13:58:14

In such cases there should be no difference but recently, without any reason, an app does not work anymore in case of a small lib upgrade and so i need to revdep-rebuild the broken packages

But i dont know much about such a relation between Qt 4.6 and KDE. Im waiting until KDE compiled succesfully on /gentoo (47 of 432) and then im going to try your font

mcsaba77 · 2009-12-15 15:00:53

Adriano ML wrote:

KDE 4.3 is butter smooth on my 1GB Athlon 64 939, geforce 7600GS. Be it with or without kwin composition. My aton with GMA 950 fares really well too.
Can't wait for QT 4.6 and KDE 4.4

I second that, I dunno how can anyone describe KDE 4.3.x as slow, unless something is seriously broken in the installation, or if there are driver problems...

As to ram usage, mine eats 14% of total RAM (I have 2 GB, so that's <300Mb) after start up (and yes, I wait for all services to load, in fact System Load Viever shows only 12% at first), which is ridiculously low considering all the services it provides. I mean KDE is not fluxbox, and yes, I have everything that's needed for a rich desktop experience running in the background (wicd, hal, cups, pulseaudio, kdm, etc.). I also have 2 desktops with different wallpapers and widgets on each, plus I have desktop effects enabled.

mythus · 2009-12-15 16:57:15

mcsaba77 wrote:

Adriano ML wrote:
KDE 4.3 is butter smooth on my 1GB Athlon 64 939, geforce 7600GS. Be it with or without kwin composition. My aton with GMA 950 fares really well too.
Can't wait for QT 4.6 and KDE 4.4
I second that, I dunno how can anyone describe KDE 4.3.x as slow, unless something is seriously broken in the installation, or if there are driver problems...
As to ram usage, mine eats 14% of total RAM (I have 2 GB, so that's <300Mb) after start up (and yes, I wait for all services to load, in fact System Load Viever shows only 12% at first), which is ridiculously low considering all the services it provides. I mean KDE is not fluxbox, and yes, I have everything that's needed for a rich desktop experience running in the background (wicd, hal, cups, pulseaudio, kdm, etc.). I also have 2 desktops with different wallpapers and widgets on each, plus I have desktop effects enabled.

That really depends upon the system as well.

For example, I can run KDE (vanilla) on my old p4 1.6 ghz computer with an nvidia geforce 2 agp video card and 1 gb ram. It runs, and as long as i am not trying to do too much it's cpu usage stays around 25%. I can even use kopete on it and do some light browsing. But eventually it stars to slow down as CPU usage races up amongst other things. I 'can' enable compositing effects but that slows tings down even more until eventually it freezes or kde disables it automatically. Thus I am using fluxbox for that computer.

On my wife's pentium dual core 1.6 gig laptop with 2 gig ram, kde(mod) runs perfectly fine and is fast and able to handle xp in virtual mode with no real problems and with compositing effects on. Occasionally though it does swap when running virtualbox xp and other programs. But other than that, it is running as fast (after the inital load) as fluxbox on my much lder desktop.

I do suspect that once I get my new machine built in march, that I will be able to enjoy KDE with much greater speeds on it. But it just goes to show you, that on older computers KDE does not feel fast and does feel heavy. Also there is something to be said about not having your DE automatically using up 300-400 MB and loading it's inital settings within a mere second, leaving much more free memory to load other programs faster. But I do also agree that on the latest and greatest machines out there now, unless you are really watching the memory usages like a hawk and timing everything with a nanosecond stopwatch, you probably wouldn't notice the differences in app loading speeds on kde or a lighter environment like fluxbox. Infact you may notice that kde loads kde apps faster than fluxbox loads kde apps (especially true if you use preloading).

mcsaba77 · 2009-12-15 18:30:21

mythus wrote:

mcsaba77 wrote:
Adriano ML wrote:
KDE 4.3 is butter smooth on my 1GB Athlon 64 939, geforce 7600GS. Be it with or without kwin composition. My aton with GMA 950 fares really well too.
Can't wait for QT 4.6 and KDE 4.4
I second that, I dunno how can anyone describe KDE 4.3.x as slow, unless something is seriously broken in the installation, or if there are driver problems...
As to ram usage, mine eats 14% of total RAM (I have 2 GB, so that's <300Mb) after start up (and yes, I wait for all services to load, in fact System Load Viever shows only 12% at first), which is ridiculously low considering all the services it provides. I mean KDE is not fluxbox, and yes, I have everything that's needed for a rich desktop experience running in the background (wicd, hal, cups, pulseaudio, kdm, etc.). I also have 2 desktops with different wallpapers and widgets on each, plus I have desktop effects enabled.
That really depends upon the system as well.

Can't argue with that, you're right of course. I'm just saying that characterizing KDE as "slow as hell" or resource hungry is wrong. I'd say it runs pretty well on most hardware that came out in the past 3-4 years (depending on how cutting-edge your system was when you bought it). And it seems to me that resource usage is proportionate to the services it offers. It is also quite scalable imho. I think you could reduce mem usage to below 200Mb if you really wanted (for example, different wallpapers for each virtual desktop eat megabytes of memory alone) while still retaining most of the comfort it offers. That said, I'd probably go for fluxbox for older hardware. Or enlightenment - I had enlightenment set up on a bunch of old p2 boxes with 128-256Mb ram running FreeBSD, Enlightenment, Opera Browser (they chocked on anything gecko-based), Rox-filer and GAIM (at that time gaim was the best im client) in a small comp. lab at university for students to browse the net and chat... They even run some fancy desktop effects (like pulsating icons for the above apps on mouse-over )

Mikko777 · 2009-12-15 19:33:45

OT:

I was kinda happy to get kde4 use all of my 4GB of ram
(unused ram is bad ram)

Now in kde 4.4 theres even a slider to make akonadi/nepomuk use more ram, oh the joy!

And yes qt 4.6 does feel a bit snappier in kde4.4, don't think it made any difference with kde4.3.
(altho you will prolly want to disable all the new animation thingies in kde4.4 if you like speed over eyecandy)

Arch Linux

#1 2009-12-13 23:46:17

Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#2 2009-12-14 00:35:29

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#3 2009-12-14 01:36:56

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#4 2009-12-14 07:26:47

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#5 2009-12-14 08:16:10

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#6 2009-12-14 08:22:03

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#7 2009-12-14 08:43:32

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#8 2009-12-14 09:24:47

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#9 2009-12-14 12:06:23

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#10 2009-12-14 15:12:37

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#11 2009-12-14 23:04:33

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#12 2009-12-15 07:01:15

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#13 2009-12-15 07:27:53

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#14 2009-12-15 07:33:03

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#15 2009-12-15 11:35:45

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#16 2009-12-15 13:17:37

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#17 2009-12-15 13:29:57

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#18 2009-12-15 13:33:29

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#19 2009-12-15 13:36:49

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#20 2009-12-15 13:52:08

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#21 2009-12-15 13:58:14

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#22 2009-12-15 15:00:53

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#23 2009-12-15 16:57:15

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#24 2009-12-15 18:30:21

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

#25 2009-12-15 19:33:45

Re: Qt 4.6 Speed improvements

Board footer