On February 19, 2004 03:59 pm, Dexter Filmore wrote:
> Why don't you try a 21st century computer?: PIII500=joke. Get something
Agreed. Like I said, I'll upgrade if that will make a difference. My question,
though, is that if Win2k can run quickly with my very old computer, how is it
that KDE can't? Will upgrading hardware be *enough*? Or will I always be
seeing KDE as slower than Win2k?
> with dual channel DDR RAM interface like nForce2 or i865 and a CPU with
> lotsa L2 cache, not Celery or Duron (which are jokes, too), this speeds up
> significantly.
Thanks, I'll look into it.
> If that's not your way of conquering problem, switch distros. Gentoo for
> example, compile everything with -O3 -march=i686 (might take a year with
Ouch. That sounds like a painful solution. Just getting FC1 installed/running
from ISOs took a week (long story).
> Try disabling as many services you don't need.
Already done.
> If you have two drives: move swap to the one where Linux does *not* sit on
> so the OS can do what the OS has to do and swapping doesn't get in its way.
Good advice, but I'm not having any noticeable slowdowns from disk access.
Although my disk is admittedly old and slow, I don't notice it. Just ...
silent pauses ... every time a window of any kind is opened in KDE.
> If you are running KDE3.2, check for mem leaks with top. I had some serious
> trouble there which made me go back to 3.1.5 for the moment.
Thanks. I can run top, that much I can figure out, but how to interpret a
memory leak is a bit beyond me. Any hints?
--
Trevor Smith | trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
___________________________________________________
.
Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
