well, my comp has 512mb ddr 2700 and a p4 1.8 i finally gave up on knoppix. I used the first version on this same comp and was very pleased. I've moved on to Mandrake 9.0. Thankx for all the help!!!!
Printable View
well, my comp has 512mb ddr 2700 and a p4 1.8 i finally gave up on knoppix. I used the first version on this same comp and was very pleased. I've moved on to Mandrake 9.0. Thankx for all the help!!!!
I've tried the older version on many computers, with no more than a single network card each. They all had plenty of RAM, and I burnt it at 12x (my burner's speed) and at 48x (a burner at work) on cheap media with no issues. Knoppix booted up fine on all the machines, including my own.
The new version seems to take an abnormal time (all of the time) but everything works (eventually), no errors come up so I'm not sure if it's a md5sum issue. There is no timeout occuring with the network card, the whole thing is slow even through the detection phase in framebuffer mode. (Before X starts, but it takes a couple of minutes from X being started to actually getting into KDE)
I never had to specify DMA before (with the older version) but I guess I will try it, I'm going to keep trying and testing things out.
KDE 3.1~ is a damn monster. Knoppix on my main machine (anything past 3-24 I think) which is a 1575mhz (overclocked) AMD T-bird and 512mb of DDR 2100 running at full 2400 slows to a crawl.
Do what I do. Fluxbox. :)
Boots in seconds.
I hope they fix gnome soon..
It's not knoppix it's kde 3.1.1, on my debian system kdeinit is using 60% of my cpu almost all of the time.
my load average for a single user desktop system is 2.44, 2.05, 1.77
it never used to hardly ever used to get to 1.00, 1.00, 1.00
it was usually below 1 almost always.
I hope kde gets fixed soon, I'm bummed I upgraded to it!
rock
What's Fluxbox?
I personally don't think it's KDE, it's slow before KDE even starts, I think it's my CD media, but I'm going to test further.
Update: It seemed to be the media, it's booting much faster now.
Fluxbox is a very light very different desktop environment. Try the
desktop=fluxbox cheat code. When I first saw it my reaction was "what the...?" :D
It's interesting to note that KDE3.1 is hogging so many resources on some very fast machines however, my 550 w/256 megs runs it no problem. Go figure???
Fluxbox is another window manager for X windows. It is really small and pretty fast. I use this on older systems.Quote:
Originally Posted by IoN_PuLse
I did a side by side comparison of Knoppix 3.1 and 3.2 on the same machine and 3.2 is very slow comparitively when booting into KDE. KDE is the culprit. It should speed up over time, look for KDE 3.1.2+ to have code and speed enhancements.
If you need speed use the boot cheatcodes to specify a different Window Manager.
How about a little question/answer about v.3.2.
(1) what kind of processor and how much memory are you using?
(2) what version are you running?
(2) is knoppix 3.2 really slow, slightly slower, or about the same as v.3.1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
My answers:
booting from cd at school on a PIII-450 w/ 128MB ram with the 3-26 release the boot process is longer (it's doing a few more things), and 3.2 seems slightly slower than 3.1 when running. (kde 3.1.1 is almost as fast from cd on these machines as it is on my AMD-400 woody install after kde 3.1.1 has been running for two or three days)
Note: I had a 3-23 release that took forever to load, I threw the cd and iso away!
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
It seems weird to me that 3.2 3-26 runs OK on a PIII-450 w/ 128mb ram but not on new high speed machines, cd problems?
rock
All the machines I tested 3.1 on were 1700+'s and above, even a duron 1.3ghz, with 256 MB or RAM or more, and it was really fast. 3.2 seemed to be VERY slow, I'm not talking about just KDE but even before that. It seems to have been my cd media, now everything is quite fast although I noticed KDE being a little slower, it's not that much of a difference. (for me) Sure looks nicer :)