I think Linux hates Celerons even more than Windows does

[beer]

I'm running Redhat 7.3/KDE3 on a Celeron 500 with 392 MB RAM. It just is dog slow....slower than Win2K on a celeron 466, which is the closest comparion I can speak of. Is this normal? Is it just because Linux hates celerons or do I likely have a config wrong? It's on an Abit VH6, btw...via chipset.

 

[Colt45]

correction:

KDE3 hates celerons as much as windows does.

 

[linuxboy]

Lies ! I like Celeries


Cheers !

 

[GigaCluster]

Perhaps recompile your kernel with Celeron support?

 

[Willoughbyva]

I haven't used KDE3 yet still on KDE 2.2. I think KDE is a little slow loading (athlon 1.4, 512ram), but does ok. Try out Gnome, it is faster loading. There are also other window managers that are light and are decent to use, though I never really use them.

Will

 

[beer]

Originally posted by: GigaCluster
Perhaps recompile your kernel with Celeron support?

wtf
Are you being serious there??

 

[Goosemaster]

I compiled my first Kernel Friday



Not really that hard....


Just as easy as pulling MR. Torvalds out of your a#s







Actually IT wasn't that bad

 

[Goosemaster]

one question.



Where in the make.conf file do you set the cflags and such.



I saw a bunch of examples, but no specific line where I was suppossed to enter data


Any help?

 

[The Stigenator]

install blackbox an xwindows thinge.. loads a million times faster.

 

[manly]

Originally posted by: Elemental007

Originally posted by: GigaCluster
Perhaps recompile your kernel with Celeron support?

wtf
Are you being serious there??

He's serious. There are a handful of "programs" that if recompiled with i686 optimizations would likely improve performance. E.g.

Linux kernel
glibc
XFree86
KDE3

In general, compiling for your specific processor is not worth the effort (Gentoo users think otherwise). These days, your distro probably already compiles the kernel and glibc with i686 optimizations. All the performance critical parts of the kernel are written in inline assembly anyway.

Sounds like something in your config is wrong though. While KDE3 isn't the fastest software on the planet, it should run way better than "dog slow" on your PC. I'd investigate configuration issues before I even considered bothering with custom compilation.

My first guess is to check that DMA is enabled on the hard drive(s).

 

[beer]

Originally posted by: manly

Originally posted by: Elemental007

Originally posted by: GigaCluster
Perhaps recompile your kernel with Celeron support?

wtf
Are you being serious there??

He's serious. There are a handful of "programs" that if recompiled with i686 optimizations would likely improve performance. E.g.

Linux kernel
glibc
XFree86
KDE3

In general, compiling for your specific processor is not worth the effort (Gentoo users think otherwise). These days, your distro probably already compiles the kernel and glibc with i686 optimizations. All the performance critical parts of the kernel are written in inline assembly anyway.

Sounds like something in your config is wrong though. While KDE3 isn't the fastest software on the planet, it should run way better than "dog slow" on your PC. I'd investigate configuration issues before I even considered bothering with custom compilation.

My first guess is to check that DMA is enabled on the hard drive(s).

Is this the best way to enable DMA??

 

[manly]

Originally posted by: Elemental007

Is this the best way to enable DMA??

Yeah hdparm is what you would use. You don't need to download the source because it comes with any decent Linux distro.

Use it to check to see if DMA is set. Then use it to benchmark your disk throughput.

If DMA is off, turn it on and then benchmark again. If that was the problem and solution, then the easiest permanent fix is to stick the necessary couple hdparm lines into /etc/init.d/boot.local

As an aside, the latest versions of most distros does enable DMA on the IDE interfaces, but it's still worth checking. Most don't enable DMA on the CD/DVD drives and "power users" who watch DVDs in Linux naturally like to enable DMA for their DVD-ROM drive. I'd suspect it's also a good idea for high-speed CD-RW drives.

 

[J3anyus]

Yeah, there's nothing wrong with Redhat, it's KDE. KDE is a massive resource hog, and even runs slow on pretty decent machines. GNOME is a bit faster, but is still bloated and slow. If you want speed, don't run X.