Live data from Hacker News

Ubuntu now requires more RAM than Windows 11

howtogeek.com

101–110 of 198 posts

Re: Ubuntu now requires more RAM than Windows 11

#102
post #18

Is this a Ubuntu issue or a Gnome issue? What about Lubuntu, Kubuntu, etc?

The article suggests that Xubuntu (which uses xfce instead of Gnome) uses much less memory. I don't know how true that is, but it seems reasonable that xfce uses some less memory.

sure probably even git a bit less,

but I still would recommend 6 GiB.

no matter of the OS

the problem here is more the programs you run on top of the OS (browser, electron apps, etc.)

realistic speaking you should budged at least 1GiB for you OS even if it's minimalist, and to avoid issues make it 2GiB of OS + some emergency buffer, caches, load spikes etc.

and 2GiB for your browser :(

and 500MiB for misc apps (mail, music, etc.)

wait we are already at 4.5 GiB I still need open office ....

even if xfc would safe 500 MiB it IMHO wouldn't matter (for the recommendation)

and sure you can make it work, can only have one tab open at a time, close the browser every time you don't need it, not use Spotify or YT etc.

but that isn't what people expect, so give them a recommendation which will work with what they expect and if someone tries to run it at smaller RAM it may work, but if it doesn't it at least isn't your fault

Re: Ubuntu now requires more RAM than Windows 11

#103
post #89
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Today's browsers tend to be huge memory hogs too. Software's attitude of "there's always more memory" is coming back to bite them as prices of ram increase.

IMHO, browsers might prioritize execution speed somewhat more than memory. There is the Pareto tradeoff principle where it's unlikely to optimize all the parameters - if you optimize one, you are likely to sacrifice others. Also more memory consumption (unlike CPU) doesn't decrease power efficiency that much, so, more memory might even help with that by reducing CPU usage with caching.

TBH your comments come off as either very misleading or just uneducated on the nature of performance. Troubling indeed.

Re: Ubuntu now requires more RAM than Windows 11

#104
post #73

The article itself acknowledges that the headline is bullshit: > The change isn't about the core operating system becoming resource-hungry. Instead, it reflects the way people use computers today—multiple browser tabs, web apps, and multitasking workflows Basically the change reflects the fact that, at this level of analysis (how much RAM do I need in my consumer PC), the OS is irrelevant these days. If you use a web…

The headline is clickbait and the acknowledgement is LLM

I also feel bad for human em dash fans…

Re: Ubuntu now requires more RAM than Windows 11

#105
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMHO, browsers might prioritize execution speed somewhat more than memory. There is the Pareto tradeoff principle where it's unlikely to optimize all the parameters - if you optimize one, you are likely to sacrifice others. Also more memory consumption (unlike CPU) doesn't decrease power efficiency that much, so, more memory might even help with that by reducing CPU usage with caching.

TBH your comments come off as either very misleading or just uneducated on the nature of performance. Troubling indeed.

Can you enlighten me why it's misleading or uneducated?

Re: Ubuntu now requires more RAM than Windows 11

#106
post #52

Is this a Ubuntu issue or a Gnome issue? What about Lubuntu, Kubuntu, etc?

I think this is a snap issue.

I’d imagine that all of Canonical’s flavors/spins ship with snap, so if the resources are lighter on say xubuntu then it’s probably not snap.

Snap still kinda egh though ;-D

Re: Ubuntu now requires more RAM than Windows 11

#107
post #69

From my understanding this is an official statement, not a benchmark result. > The change isn't about the core operating system becoming resource-hungry. Instead, it reflects the way people use computers today—multiple browser tabs, web apps, and multitasking workflows, all of which demand additional memory. So it is more about the 3rd party software instead of OS or desktop environment. Actually, nowadays it's recom…

No because as far as we know 26.04 won't enable zswap or zram whereas Windows and MacOS both have memory compression technology of some sort. So Ubuntu will use significantly more memory for most tasks when facing memory pressure.

Apparently it's still in discussion but it's April now so seems unlikely.

Kind of weird how controversial it is considering DOS had QEMM386 way back in 1987.

Re: Ubuntu now requires more RAM than Windows 11

#108
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

XFCE is saddled with its GTK requirement, and GTK gets worse with every version. Even though XFCE is still on GTK3, that's a big downgrade from GTK2 because it forces you to run Wayland if you don't want your GUI frame rate arbitrary capped at 60 fps. For people wanting the old-fashioned fast and simple GUI experience, I recommend LXQt.

What use is there in display frame rates above 60 fps?

Outside of gaming, not much. However, now that I'm used to a 144Hz main monitor, there is no world where I would get back. You just feel the difference.

So basically, no use when you've not tasted 120+Hz displays. And don't because once you do, you won't go back.

Re: Ubuntu now requires more RAM than Windows 11

#109

How much RAM does Omarchy use? Anyone running the OS after the media hyped it a couple of months back?

It's Arch based, with (iirc) Hyperland as it's "DE", so really not much memory I'd guess.

My desktop runs Arch with Sway (so quite close), three monitors, and uses ~400MB ram after boot. Most of it are the framebuffers. All the rest is eaten by Firefox, rust-analyzer and qemu.

Post reply on HN