Compared boot times: XFCE/MATE/Cinnamon/KDE

Chat about Linux in general

Compared boot times: XFCE/MATE/Cinnamon/KDE

Postby geoffm on Sat Oct 26, 2013 10:03 am

Have anyone compared boot times of the concurring DEs on a same machine?
I expect XFCE < MATE < Cinnamon < KDE but I would like to know by how much.
Maybe if enough people share their boot times we would have an idea how significant the difference is.

Here on my XPS M1330 with 5400 RPM HDD:
MATE ± 58 secs
Cinnamon: ± 64 secs
Custom build w/ Gigabyte Z87MX-D3h | Intel Core i5 4670 | 8GB DD3 | 250GB SSD
geoffm
Level 3
Level 3
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 8:34 am

Linux Mint is funded by ads and donations.
 

Re: Compared boot times: XFCE/MATE/Cinnamon/KDE

Postby Flemur on Sat Oct 26, 2013 1:02 pm

eMachines et1831-07, Mint13, time from grub list selection:
fluxbox: 26-27 sec.
XFCE: 30 sec.
Mint 16/Xfce/fluxbox, Manjaro/fluxbox, LMDE/MATE
User avatar
Flemur
Level 5
Level 5
 
Posts: 602
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 9:41 pm

Re: Compared boot times: XFCE/MATE/Cinnamon/KDE

Postby xenopeek on Sat Oct 26, 2013 1:22 pm

I've done such a test on Linux Mint 15. I have a few years old computer, though it does have a SSD. Generally Linux Mint 15 boots in about 9 seconds. Xfce is fastest, KDE almost ties with Xfce, Cinnamon almost ties with KDE, and MATE is the slowest of the bunch. Measured from GRUB loaded to the moment the menu can be opened on the panel (especially MATE is a bit slow here; showing the desktop and panel long before the menu actually can be opened). No surprises here as MATE is the most resource heavy of the bunch, with Cinnamon being the second most resource heavy, KDE the third most (so second least resource heavy), and Xfce the least resource heavy.

But hey, save up for a SSD and that will make more of a difference (by far) than picking another desktop environment :)
Forum Rules | IRC Channel Rules
Image
Arch Linux / 64-bit / Gnome Shell
User avatar
xenopeek
Level 21
Level 21
 
Posts: 13700
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 3:58 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Compared boot times: XFCE/MATE/Cinnamon/KDE

Postby geoffm on Sat Oct 26, 2013 1:50 pm

I agree, and I actually did. In fact I bought a whole new computer, I built my own desktop with very performant parts. I'm really happy with it. But I still use my old laptop that I leave around the living room, I pick it up several times a day to browse the web or to watch videos. Since I have to turn it on often and don't use it for work, I don't have to go for the most efficient interface but I would prefer to have the quickest one. Right now I'm running LM15-MATE and it has an annoying problem of shutting down half the time when waking up from sleep. I also have LM13-cinnamon on another partition, however this one can't connect to the wifi anymore for an unknown reason. So I'm thinking of a new install with XFCE, hoping that it would be slightly faster.
I'm surprised you find MATE the slowest, I thought as an equivalent of gnome2 it would be just behind XFCE. On my laptop it boots a bit faster than cinnamon.
Custom build w/ Gigabyte Z87MX-D3h | Intel Core i5 4670 | 8GB DD3 | 250GB SSD
geoffm
Level 3
Level 3
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Compared boot times: XFCE/MATE/Cinnamon/KDE

Postby xenopeek on Sat Oct 26, 2013 2:11 pm

Cinnamon and MATE you should compare on Linux Mint 14 or above version (so Cinnamon 1.6 or newer), as the Cinnamon version (1.4) that shipped with Linux Mint 13 still had a ton of cruft from Gnome Shell to be removed--and all that cruft made it resource heavy and slow to load. Cinnamon 1.6 version cut all that Gnome Shell cruft away and that has immensely improved Cinnamon, easily outpacing MATE on all fronts.

But there may be other factors, as some users like you state that for them MATE is faster to load than Cinnamon. Is that on a clean install I ask, or one slowed down by applets :) Some users dug into that a while ago and some older applets can really drag down Cinnamon performance (these aren't installed by default). Regardless, perhaps your graphics card driver plays a part here also. I use Intel graphics.

Anyway, Xfce might boot faster but I think you'll have to do some more tweaking to get it to boot significantly faster (so that you can say for sure it's faster, without looking at a clock). From the default loaded services there are a bunch you can disable. Service not loaded = less programs to load during boot. For fun I had a Arch Linux install with just the minimum Xfce desktop installation. It booted in less than a second :lol:
Forum Rules | IRC Channel Rules
Image
Arch Linux / 64-bit / Gnome Shell
User avatar
xenopeek
Level 21
Level 21
 
Posts: 13700
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 3:58 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Compared boot times: XFCE/MATE/Cinnamon/KDE

Postby killer de bug on Sat Oct 26, 2013 2:25 pm

Which Desktop manager are you using ?

Because with MDM and Cinnamon, I have a 15 secondes delay between login and desktop apparition. And this is not solved with Cinnamon 2.0. Il will probably switch for lightDM and the guest session. :mrgreen:
If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. [Isaac Newton]
User avatar
killer de bug
Level 6
Level 6
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: France

Re: Compared boot times: XFCE/MATE/Cinnamon/KDE

Postby xenopeek on Sat Oct 26, 2013 4:40 pm

I'm using MDM, no issues here. But I have the default theme and applets, and as noted there are some older Cinnamon themes (I forgot about those in previous post) and applets that can really drag down Cinnamon performance and probably time to get to the desktop.
Forum Rules | IRC Channel Rules
Image
Arch Linux / 64-bit / Gnome Shell
User avatar
xenopeek
Level 21
Level 21
 
Posts: 13700
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 3:58 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Compared boot times: XFCE/MATE/Cinnamon/KDE

Postby shengchieh on Sat Oct 26, 2013 10:16 pm

My hunch (correct me if wrong) is you could see how long for the liveDVD of the 4 distros to boot. I.e.,

liveDVD LM KDE vs liveDVD LM Cinnaoim vs liveDVD LM MATE vs liveDVD LM XFCE

It'll give you relative comparision boot time w/o installing them all.

Sheng-Chieh
shengchieh
Level 4
Level 4
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 1:25 am

Re: Compared boot times: XFCE/MATE/Cinnamon/KDE

Postby geoffm on Sun Oct 27, 2013 12:08 am

shengchieh wrote:you could see how long for the liveDVD of the 4 distros to boot.
It'll give you relative comparision boot time w/o installing them all.


Good point. I could even use VMs I guess I could measure relative performances.
Custom build w/ Gigabyte Z87MX-D3h | Intel Core i5 4670 | 8GB DD3 | 250GB SSD
geoffm
Level 3
Level 3
 
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 8:34 am

Re: Compared boot times: XFCE/MATE/Cinnamon/KDE

Postby killer de bug on Sun Oct 27, 2013 7:51 am

xenopeek wrote:I'm using MDM, no issues here. But I have the default theme and applets, and as noted there are some older Cinnamon themes (I forgot about those in previous post) and applets that can really drag down Cinnamon performance and probably time to get to the desktop.


I will try with an other theme but I don't think it will change anything. When you log in for the first time, it's very long. If you log out, log in again, it's really fast.
It's more something related to the boot process :wink:
If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. [Isaac Newton]
User avatar
killer de bug
Level 6
Level 6
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: France

Linux Mint is funded by ads and donations.
 

Return to Chat about Linux

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 4 guests