• OctopusNemeses@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    8GB was barely enough 10 years ago. That’s when I switched to Arch+KDE. Then KDE started using more. memory.

      • moxymarauder@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        21 hours ago

        agreed. KDE is pretty much the gold standard of the usability versus resource usage tradeoff, IMHO. From what I’ve seen: Websites/Web Browsers = worst offenders.

      • OctopusNemeses@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        The difference was hundreds of MB, but when you’re working with 8GB every bit counts. At that time KDE had an edge over Gnome. At some point the difference wasn’t there anymore.

        I was rationing what software I had open so as to avoid hitting swap because that’s when there’s a noticeable lag. Gnome was worse at recovering from that.

        • kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          22 hours ago

          If you want lightweight, KDE is not your best choice. LXQt and Xfce are actually intended for low resource usage.

          • innermachine@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            I have a POS HP stream kicking around. Celeron and 2gb ram on it. It runs well with antix, I have used lxqt and xfce on it and been able to Google things and browse articles on the web, write word docs smoothly. I put kde plasma on it struggles now. Really it’s time to retire that thing, but I like to occasionally distro hop on it and see what will run on that bunk hardware. So far antiX has been by far snappiest on that laptop, but it’s not as pretty as KDE :c