Linux on a diet??

D

Dr. Righteous

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 1, 2007
Messages
3,163
Behold......8 cores of goodness:

AMD FX 8120 OCed to a (conservative) 4Ghz
128GB SSD
8 GB Vengence RAM


Here is the score.
This system is going to be used to transcode DVDs and Blu-Rays on a small linux partition on the SSD,
but primarily this will be a gaming system with windows 7 on it.
I really do NOT need a graphic eye candy desktop like Gnome or KDE.
Just need a few linux apps; namely HandBrake and MakeMKV to get the transcoding done.
Windows is NOT optimized for this processor and does much better under linux; especially in applications like video coding.

Any suggestions?
 
Have fun installing ArchLinux! :D

If you want a light version of Linux that's really really light then look no further than Puppy Linux, but I'm not sure how well their package manager will fair with your use. Puppy Linux is a lot like Chrome OS but with a bit more functionality. Great for dumb web browsing but I wouldn't use it heavily.

I'd definitely pick something .deb based. They're pretty much all the same and vary mostly in what software is included in the .ISO, which, if we're honest, doesn't really matter much. Lubuntu is pretty light and uses LXDE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lubuntu#Lubuntu_13.04

For the stuff that you don't need you can easily get rid of. And if you can find another .deb-based distro with fewer prepackaged applications then that works too.

Like I said, it really doesn't make a difference ;P Good support always helps and that's where I'd suggest Ubuntu over the other distros. Their forums are more active and that's a good thing.
 
pelo said:
Have fun installing ArchLinux! :D

If you want a light version of Linux that's really really light then look no further than Puppy Linux, but I'm not sure how well their package manager will fair with your use. Puppy Linux is a lot like Chrome OS but with a bit more functionality. Great for dumb web browsing but I wouldn't use it heavily.

I'd definitely pick something .deb based. They're pretty much all the same and vary mostly in what software is included in the .ISO, which, if we're honest, doesn't really matter much. Lubuntu is pretty light and uses LXDE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lubuntu#Lubuntu_13.04

For the stuff that you don't need you can easily get rid of. And if you can find another .deb-based distro with fewer prepackaged applications then that works too.

Like I said, it really doesn't make a difference ;P Good support always helps and that's where I'd suggest Ubuntu over the other distros. Their forums are more active and that's a good thing.
Click to expand...

Yes their forums are so active that if your question is not answered in five minutes by someone who knows what they are talking about, it never will be... As in five minutes you'll be off the Subforum front page and never seen by anyone.

The forum support model blows on anything as overpopulated as Ubuntu Forums.

Arch Wiki is probably the best Linux support source out there bar none. Anything you need to know is mentioned and explained.
 
Lubuntu doesn't sound too bad. I really do want to stick to the Ubuntu ecosystem and debian packages.

I just got off Genome and went to Kubuntu for the KDE desktop on my main work station.
There is where I do all my professional work and it ROCKS For that.
But it is still crammed for of crap I don't need or want. Need something with a small foot print.
 
Dr. Righteous said:
Lubuntu doesn't sound too bad. I really do want to stick to the Ubuntu ecosystem and debian packages.

I just got off Genome and went to Kubuntu for the KDE desktop on my main work station.
There is where I do all my professional work and it ROCKS For that.
But it is still crammed for of crap I don't need or want. Need something with a small foot print.
Click to expand...

If that is what you want, then you're set.

Problem being that as I said anything ending *buntu is exactly as slow as anything else ending in *buntu. Because you're running exactly the same carbon copy underlying kernel and OS, and all you're changing is the eye candy. You can achieve the exact same effect by simply installing a different WM or DE on top of the *buntu you have now, and logging into that other DE or WM. You'll still need ALL the hundreds upon hundreds of megabytes of KDE or Gnome libs installed and running for probably all the apps you use.

You won't be any lighter or faster IRL, especially with a modern system that wouldn't struggle with any Linux to begin with.
 
The biggest factor in performance between distros is, oddly enough, the desktop interface.

The underlying kernel is very hardy and all derived from the main linux kernel. And, like you said, all Linux distros are inherently light thus modern hardware will never a problem running it (minus driver compatibility)

The main factor when choosing a Linux distro should be 1 - support, 2 - package manager, and 3 - desktop interface. Those are the 3 biggest differences as far as an average user is concerned. Once you decide amongst those 3 then you can start narrowing down the choices in order to find what suits you best.
 
Running Compiz/Unity can be a huge drag on Ubuntu. You notice it more on older hardware, XFCE, LXDE, or even 'classic' GNOME is so much snappier.

Even with a ton of apps installed a Lubuntu install is only like 3GB of HD space and starts out with 200MB RAM used.
 
Windows XP (kidding, kidding, but not really)

There's Slackware and several other simple to install distros less bloated than Ubuntu.
 
I believe Slax is like what, 200MB in total size? With KDE also. It's been on a few Linux blog headlines.
 
Manjaro Linux is a good balance between lightness and functionality. It's based on Arch. You can pick which version you want based on desktop. (Xfce, Kde, Gnome, or Lxde)

It's lighter than any Ubuntu equivalents, yet simple enough to still use.
 
Why do you need a desktop at all? Grab the x264 command line, kill the X server and run it. Doesn't matter one bit what distro you use.
 
Skripka said:
Ha. Anything ending with *buntu is anything but light.

Try Arch with *box or e17 or other window manager
Click to expand...

I think that depends on your definition of "light".

I consider sub 8G disk & 1G ram or less "light". In that case the *buntus should work fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top