On 2/27/22 08:14, Dr. Noah Bodie wrote:
> On 02/23/2022 07:27 AM, Marco Moock wrote:
>> Am Mittwoch, 23. Februar 2022, um 12:18:01 Uhr schrieb Andrei Z.:
>>
>>> KDE vs GNOME: What's the Ultimate Linux Desktop Choice? - It's FOSS
>
>> Neither KDE nor GNOME is the best one. Both wasting too much resources.
>
> Yup! I'm on XFCE now and it's faster than kDE.

Maybe instead of using Ubuntu designed to use Gnome you might switch to
a distro designed from the getgo to use KDE. XFCW will be
faster on some hardware but in my opinion it gives up too much.
Are you using Xubuntu, Linux Lite, or Lubuntu?
Some folks think the Linux Lite is the best of these.
But I use PCLinuxOS 64 and it keeps its KDE up to date. It is
a rolling release which means constantly updated which is not
an esoteric command line paackage manager but Synaptic which
makes it incredibly simple to do upates.
bliss - brought to you by the power and ease of PCLinuxOS
and a minor case of hypergraphia

--
bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com

Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> writes:
>What's interesting, is not even the mainstream CPU designs,
>use all the features provided by current DRAM. It's been like
>that for at least four generations.
>
>There are no long bursts, even though long bursts are supported.
>Usually the designers are cache-line-size oriented. And this
>means an access cycle is pretty expensive (taking 100 cycles
>for a 4 cycle burst). Perhaps this design would have an
>8 cycle burst, depending on the size of the cache line.

The 64-byte cache line seems to be pretty optimal for general-purpose
CPUs, so much that JEDEC has designed the recent DDR generations
around it: DDR3 and DDR4 with 8 beats of 64 bits and DDR5 with 16
beats of 32 bits. Optimal in the sense that cache hit rates are lower
with longer cache lines; apparently there is not enough spatial
locality for longer cache lines in general-purpose code.

>And modern processors also fabricate the details of their
>transfer bandwidth. The marketing materials tends to take
>the number of channels and multiply by the theoretical bandwidth,
>when nothing could be further from the truth. The numbers
>can be off by a factor of 8, just for starters.

Intel and (since Zen) AMD seem to be pretty good at getting pretty
close to the theoretical maximum bandwidth from a channel for
sequential accesses. For multiple channels you of course will see
maximum bandwidth only if the channels are accessed in a balanced way.

>But at least for a DRAM controller, there's a chance you could
>buy a decent one.

Yes, but it seems they did not buy IP blocks (at least not good ones)
for DRAM controller, graphics, SD controller, and Ethernet (basically
everything I measured beyond the CPU core) for the JH7100 (the SoC of
the VisionFive V1); or maybe some of these are bought, but there's a
bottleneck elsewhere. And maybe the idea of Sifive is to be able to
offer these things themselves (not sure how Starfive fits in).

It certainly would fit with the original motivation of RISC-V to have
an open architecture that can be used for student projects; so you let
a student have a go at a memory controller; and another one at
improving it; while with an IP block, there is AFAIK usually no way
for you to improve it except as provided by the IP block owner.

- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html

On 2022-02-27, Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

> Maybe instead of using Ubuntu designed to use Gnome you might switch
> to a distro designed from the getgo to use KDE.

Great example of this is Slackware which has just had a major release:
15.0.

Andrew
--
You think that's air you're breathing now?

On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 12:18:01 +0300, Andrei Z. wrote:

> KDE vs GNOME: What's the Ultimate Linux Desktop Choice? - It's FOSS
>
> https://itsfoss.com/kde-vs-gnome/

They both suck.

The only sensible/useable DE is Xfce.

--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
"Bother!" said Pooh, as Piglet pulled out the Anal Intruder.
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
Thanks, Obama: http://brandybuck.site40.net/pics/politica/thanks.jpg

On 3/7/2022 11:49 AM, Dan C wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 12:18:01 +0300, Andrei Z. wrote:
>
>> KDE vs GNOME: What's the Ultimate Linux Desktop Choice? - It's FOSS
>>
>> https://itsfoss.com/kde-vs-gnome/
>
> They both suck.
>
> The only sensible/useable DE is Xfce.
>

And now we can settle the much more important question of:

Which is better, vi or emacs?

red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> writes:

> On 3/7/2022 11:49 AM, Dan C wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 12:18:01 +0300, Andrei Z. wrote:
>>
>>> KDE vs GNOME: What's the Ultimate Linux Desktop Choice? - It's FOSS
>>>
>>> https://itsfoss.com/kde-vs-gnome/
>>
>> They both suck.
>>
>> The only sensible/useable DE is Xfce.
>>
>
> And now we can settle the much more important question of:
>
> Which is better, vi or emacs?

Errrrrrr I'm prejudiced. :)

>>
>> Which is better, vi or emacs?
>
> Errrrrrr I'm prejudiced. :)

this could be the perfect newsgroup for you then

--
random signature text inserted here

On Mon, 07 Mar 2022 17:58:54 -0800, red floyd wrote:

> On 3/7/2022 11:49 AM, Dan C wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 12:18:01 +0300, Andrei Z. wrote:
>>
>>> KDE vs GNOME: What's the Ultimate Linux Desktop Choice? - It's FOSS
>>>
>>> https://itsfoss.com/kde-vs-gnome/
>>
>> They both suck.
>>
>> The only sensible/useable DE is Xfce.
>>
>>
> And now we can settle the much more important question of:
>
> Which is better, vi or emacs?

They both suck, although vi sucks less.

Nano for the win.

--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
"Bother!" said Pooh, as he poured grease onto the interstate.
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
Thanks, Obama: http://brandybuck.site40.net/pics/politica/thanks.jpg