On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 17:05, Nick Bargnesi wrote: > On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 18:00:01 +0100, Emmanuel Seyman <seyman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 04:52:15PM +0000, Jonathan Andrews wrote: > > > > > > Pointing out the obvious why doesn't somebody test core 3 against a > > > fully source built distro like Gentoo and see if the performance gains > > > are real - thats not just benchmark, but perceived responsiveness. If > > > > Even better, test un unoptimized Gentoo against an optimized one. > > That way, you'll have identical versions of tested software. > > That's the best suggestion. In theory, I think optimized/unoptimized > builds of gentoo leading to a comparison would support the main > argument here. I for one have built KDE from qt on up optimized > versus unoptimized with no noticeable gain in anything. True, my 1.3Ghz athlon doesnt even break a sweat in the CPU stakes doing most jobs. A request for core 4 If more people has the fantastic 'kcpuload' tool available it would give them a better idea whats going on. Its in the kde archive, can it go back into core 4 as a default applet. Gnome has a good cpu monitor, but the best one kde has is missing from core ? Jon
