On 8/2/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell@email-addr-hidden-job.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 11:04 +1000, Loki Davison wrote:
> > On 8/2/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell@email-addr-hidden-job.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 20:39 -0400, M P Smoak wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday 01 August 2006 11:58, Lee Revell wrote:
> > > > > Disagree, using Fluxbox over Gnome is not likely to make a
> difference
> > > > > with a recent kernel.
> > > > >
> > > > > Lee
> > > >
> > > > Lee, do you think that the same can be said about KDE rather than
> Gnome?
> > >
> > > Yes. With a kernel patched for realtime, or a recent unpatched 2.6
> > > kernel, the choice of desktop/window manager will have no impact on
> > > realtime audio performance (as measured by number of xruns), as long as
> > > JACK is running in realtime mode.
> > >
> > > The belief that stripping down your desktop will improve realtime audio
> > > performance is a holdover from the bad old 2.4/early 2.6 days.
> > >
> > > Lee
> > >
> > >
> >
> > though if you have limited memory it can still help, right? I.e if the
> > system needs to swap because of a big desktop running? Not that i
> > really know, i run KDE and i've got 2GB ram ;)
> >
>
> I guess if you are very resource constrained it would help. Audio
> performance won't be affected, your desktop just might get slower if you
> run into swap. But I was referring to the general case.
>
> Lee
>
>
So short answer is really running a decent kernel solves all the other
worries ;)
Loki
Received on Wed Aug 2 08:15:02 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Aug 02 2006 - 08:15:02 EEST