RAM Usage for different Desktops?

PReP · 2011-12-07 11:25:56

MrCode wrote:

(and a screenshot sneaked in)
…kind of a big screenshot, don't you think?
The mods will probably notice that and "fix" it.

Uhm, i believe you are right :S

I have been made lazy by these other forums that rezises pics with IMG tags automatically somehow.

Ironically, i am thusly wasting RAM of you other thread-browsers

*PReP fixes*

ANOKNUSA · 2011-12-07 16:25:00

The subjectivity of the OP is likely the reason this thread has gone on so long. When talking about RAM usage between desktops, one needs to take into account what components of those DEs are being used. In the case of KDE: Which KDE apps are you using most often? Do you have Nepomuk running (which will eat not only a user-determined amount of RAM, but CPU power as well)? Are you using Konqueror or Arora to browse the web, or something else? Since the Plasma desktop is a modular component, it's possible to have KDE manage the background activities of your system without having Plasma running at all (and when using a WM other than KWin, Compiz or Awesome the Plasma interface becomes almost unusable anyway, as each WM addresses the root window slightly differently). The fact is, most RAM usage is determined in large part by the habits and proclivities of the user: I'm currently using i3 as a stand-alone WM, but with Firefox, Mcomix, Dolphin, Kate and Amarok all open at the moment, I'm using over 800MB of RAM, about a third of which is cached. This could be much lower, but I feel most comfortable with KDE apps, and my current RAM usage accounts for less than one-fourth the total amount of RAM available to my system.

Mr Pink57 · 2011-12-09 01:23:53

DWM by itself after boot is about 9% of my 512mb and 15% with chrome started.

Good to see another MN person here I live in St. Paul.

Last edited by Mr Pink57 (2011-12-09 01:26:00)

hitest · 2011-12-15 12:46:44

Running XFce4 with Arch (32 bit) seems to use around 126 MB RAM. My OpenBSD 5.0 VM (32 bit) uses around 26 MB RAM running Fluxbox.

redguardtoo · 2011-12-21 06:24:16

on my eeepc 701 netbook

booting into console:

             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:           490        293        197          0         56        179
-/+ buffers/cache:         57        433
Swap:            0          0          0

after starting herbstluftwm,

             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:           490        305        185          0         56        181
-/+ buffers/cache:         67        423
Swap:            0          0          0

Please note I put lots of stuff in shared-memory/tmpfs to speed up the general performance of my tiny eeepc 701.
Here is my fstab:

# 
# /etc/fstab: static file system information
#
# <file system>        <dir>         <type>    <options>          <dump> <pass>
#/dev/cdrom             /media/cd   auto    ro,user,noauto,unhide   0      0
#/dev/dvd               /media/dvd  auto    ro,user,noauto,unhide   0      0
#/dev/fd0               /media/fl   auto    user,noauto             0      0

tmpfs /var/log tmpfs size=1M,mode=1755 0 0
/dev/sda1 / ext3 defaults,noatime,nodiratime 0 1
#not necessary, since we do it in udev rules
/dev/SDHC       /mnt/sdhc        ext4    defaults       0      0

tmpfs /tmp tmpfs defaults,noatime,mode=1777 0 0
tmpfs /var/tmp tmpfs defaults,noatime,mode=1777 0 0

Last edited by redguardtoo (2011-12-21 06:40:10)

redguardtoo · 2011-12-21 07:09:30

ANOKNUSA wrote:

The subjectivity of the OP is likely the reason this thread has gone on so long. When talking about RAM usage between desktops, one needs to take into account what components of those DEs are being used. In the case of KDE: Which KDE apps are you using most often? Do you have Nepomuk running (which will eat not only a user-determined amount of RAM, but CPU power as well)? Are you using Konqueror or Arora to browse the web, or something else? Since the Plasma desktop is a modular component, it's possible to have KDE manage the background activities of your system without having Plasma running at all (and when using a WM other than KWin, Compiz or Awesome the Plasma interface becomes almost unusable anyway, as each WM addresses the root window slightly differently). The fact is, most RAM usage is determined in large part by the habits and proclivities of the user: I'm currently using i3 as a stand-alone WM, but with Firefox, Mcomix, Dolphin, Kate and Amarok all open at the moment, I'm using over 800MB of RAM, about a third of which is cached. This could be much lower, but I feel most comfortable with KDE apps, and my current RAM usage accounts for less than one-fourth the total amount of RAM available to my system.

It's kind of objective if people's toolchains are in different styles and the difference of memory usage is huge.

For example, I only use console application (netcfg,mpd,emacs-nox ....)

The meaing of squeezing every byte is,
1. Memory is always not enough for serious job
I preserve extra memory for virtual machines (windows app developement) and firefox (web developement)
2. save bucks on hardware upgrade.
3. It's also fun and good training

Last edited by redguardtoo (2011-12-21 07:37:17)

Maki · 2011-12-21 16:34:17

Isn't the pc_mem that script that tries to measure only used ram, not cached ? http://www.pixelbeat.org/scripts/ps_mem.py

http://pastebin.com/fu2gACXv

Kinfocenter shows this http://ompldr.org/vYnVtYw/snapshot1.png .
If anyone knows a more accurate way post it please

mhertz · 2011-12-22 01:31:10

Yes, the ps_mem.py script shows non-cached memory used by the running processes, but there's lots of tools doing that... What makes ps_mem.py stand out from the crowd, is that it reports PSS and USS values of said memory used, which is a much more accurate measurement, than the standard rss/shared/virt values reported by conventional tools...

The only shortcomming in ps_mem.py, is that it dosen't report memory allocated by one program for another, e.g. last I checked, urxvt and xterm used about the same mem, but xorg used about 3mb more when running xterm than urxvt...

Also, what ps_mem.py reports as shared memory used, is the memory shared with other processes divided with the number of other processes using it, so if e.g. an app is sharing a 1mb shared lib with another app, then each of these apps will be reported as using 0.5mb shared ram each etc...

Last edited by mhertz (2011-12-22 01:32:56)

sidRo · 2017-03-07 11:50:43

Gnome 3.22 ---> 1.1 Gb Ram.
Why? I don't know but Gnome use more ram than KDE.
I don't use extensions in my installation.

Pyntux · 2017-03-07 13:23:24

sidRo wrote:

Gnome 3.22 ---> 1.1 Gb Ram.
Why? I don't know but Gnome use more ram than KDE.
I don't use extensions in my installation.

You got that right, Gnome is very RAM hungry, no one can convince me that Gnome is lighter that KDE Plasma, because my KDE setup uses 350mb of RAM on clean start. On same machine Gnome uses around 900 mb RAM. Even XFCE with compiz uses more RAM than KDE plasma on my machine.

Do not even want to talk about how much faster is kde than gnome...

Last edited by Pyntux (2017-03-07 13:24:07)

ooo · 2017-03-07 14:58:32

$ free -h # after clean boot-up 
              total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available
Mem:           7.8G         90M        7.6G        800K         93M        7.5G
Swap:          8.0G          0B        8.0G
$ free -h # after starting gnome
              total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available
Mem:           7.8G        249M        7.3G        3.6M        217M        7.3G
Swap:          8.0G          0B        8.0G

If you're not happy with it, do something about it or use another desktop.
Spreading FUD won't help anybody.

Pyntux · 2017-03-07 15:33:58

ooo wrote:

$ free -h # after clean boot-up 
              total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available
Mem:           7.8G         90M        7.6G        800K         93M        7.5G
Swap:          8.0G          0B        8.0G
$ free -h # after starting gnome
              total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available
Mem:           7.8G        249M        7.3G        3.6M        217M        7.3G
Swap:          8.0G          0B        8.0G

If you're not happy with it, do something about it or use another desktop.
Spreading FUD won't help anybody.

Are you using Gnome 2?

I'm sorry, but all I wrote is my own experience and I did not know that I can not share it publicly....LOL..... I'm sorry if you got offended.

BTT:

XFCE with compiz:

free -m
              total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available
Mem:           8007         431        6975           5         599        7336
Swap:          2352           0        2352

Last edited by Pyntux (2017-03-07 15:36:38)

WorMzy · 2017-03-07 16:27:57

sidRo, please don't necrobump. A lot has changed in the past five years.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Co … bumping.22

Closing,

Arch Linux

#51 2011-12-07 11:25:56

Re: RAM Usage for different Desktops?

#52 2011-12-07 16:25:00

Re: RAM Usage for different Desktops?

#53 2011-12-09 01:23:53

Re: RAM Usage for different Desktops?

#54 2011-12-15 12:46:44

Re: RAM Usage for different Desktops?

#55 2011-12-21 06:24:16

Re: RAM Usage for different Desktops?

#56 2011-12-21 07:09:30

Re: RAM Usage for different Desktops?

#57 2011-12-21 16:34:17

Re: RAM Usage for different Desktops?

#58 2011-12-22 01:31:10

Re: RAM Usage for different Desktops?

#59 2017-03-07 11:50:43

Re: RAM Usage for different Desktops?

#60 2017-03-07 13:23:24

Re: RAM Usage for different Desktops?

#61 2017-03-07 14:58:32

Re: RAM Usage for different Desktops?

#62 2017-03-07 15:33:58

Re: RAM Usage for different Desktops?

#63 2017-03-07 16:27:57

Re: RAM Usage for different Desktops?

Board footer