Bad performance

Questions about Grub, UEFI,the liveCD and the installer
Forum rules
Before you post please read how to get help
Post Reply
fredand44
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:38 am

Bad performance

Post by fredand44 » Wed Jun 20, 2018 7:45 am

Hello guys!

I got a laptop Compaq 6910p with Sylvia 18.3, Cinnamon-32.
(I guess I could only use 32-bits OS on this machine, correct me if I'm wrong.)

I do a lot of programming and uses pretty heavy software's such as Eclipse, JBoss, Android Studio and Chromium. Sometimes some of them at the same time.
I experience some bad performance that the laptop gets very hot and some times the screen "freezes" for a like 10-20 seconds when I switch between my applications.

Would you recommend me install something else then Cinnamon?
(Correct me if I'm wrong when I say that Cinnamon is the most heavy version of Linux Mint.)

What will I miss if I choose any other flavor of Linux Mint?

Or do you guys see any other solution to my problem?
Perhaps it is time to buy a new computer?

Best regards
Fredrik

User avatar
Moem
Level 17
Level 17
Posts: 7039
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2015 9:14 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Bad performance

Post by Moem » Wed Jun 20, 2018 7:49 am

Hello, can you please post the result of the following terminal command, and enclose it in code tags? That's the button marked </>.
This is needed for pretty much any question about your system, so it's a good habit to post it straight away.

Code: Select all

inxi -Fxz
Image

If your issue is solved, kindly indicate that by editing the first post in the topic, and adding [SOLVED] to the title. Thanks!

Neil Edmond
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 893
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 10:19 am
Location: N.E. AR USA

Re: Bad performance

Post by Neil Edmond » Wed Jun 20, 2018 7:52 am

Looks like your laptop has a Core 2 Duo CPU which does support 64-bit operation, but your problems are most likely related to a lack of RAM.

User avatar
Pepi
Level 5
Level 5
Posts: 723
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 7:47 pm

Re: Bad performance

Post by Pepi » Wed Jun 20, 2018 8:24 am

I would try 18.3 Xfce on that machine. You may try Peppermint also. I found it to be faster on my mini-laptop

User avatar
Reorx
Level 11
Level 11
Posts: 3904
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 7:14 pm
Location: SE Florida, USA

Re: Bad performance

Post by Reorx » Wed Jun 20, 2018 8:52 am

The problem is probably that the machine is underpowered for "heavy software". Using a lighter DE or OS will likely have little effect on performance. The machine is simply overwhelmed. You can try doing less things at any give time (less open windows) and you should see some improvement but your workflow will suffer... The best solution would probably be to get a computer with a more modern processor (think i3, i5, or i7) and about 8GB of RAM. (awaiting inxi)
Full time Linux Mint user since 2011 - Currently running LM17C64 on my production machines.
Currently testing LM19C64 - Lookin' good so far!
Image Image

Hoser Rob
Level 12
Level 12
Posts: 4344
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 8:57 am

Re: Bad performance

Post by Hoser Rob » Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:10 am

If that machine has the same GPU as the one listed here ...

https://www.cnet.com/products/hp-compaq-6910p/specs/

... then yes, Cinnamon is quite unsuitable. That card is legacy, ie. even if you were running 17.3, where AMD closed drivers are available, it's too old for them. The open source driver (radeon) is the only one available and I would not expect that to change any time soon.

Try Xfce and turn off all DE compositing.

fredand44
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:38 am

Re: Bad performance

Post by fredand44 » Thu Jun 21, 2018 1:18 am

Hello guys!
Thanks for your help and replies!

It looks I got three options:

1) Buy a better computer, really tempting because I have used this one for ages, and the hard drive will not run for ever! (The only regrets might be it is still performing pretty good)

2) Try to find more RAM and install, might be tricky since I have never open this one. But of course a expert in the store know's how.

3) Try to install Xfce. I just saw that Tara 19 is coming soon, very soon. This option sounds really interesting. But could I ask you:

a) With Xfce is it harder to use the OS than Cinnamin, do I have to be more of a command line expert?
b) With Xfce will I miss some functions that is only available in Cinnamon, like flash-viewer or such?
c) How is it possible that Xfce can perform better? (What is the difference between heavy-weight GUI in Cinnamon, I guess it is called, and light-weight GUI in Xfce? If light-weight is faster why is not Cinnamon using it? Isn't faster always better? ;-))

Below is my system-output from inxi

Code: Select all

fredrik@fredrik-HP-Compaq-6910p ~ $ inxi -Fxz
System:    Host: fredrik-HP-Compaq-6910p Kernel: 4.10.0-38-generic i686 (32 bit gcc: 5.4.0)
           Desktop: Cinnamon 3.6.7 (Gtk 3.18.9-1ubuntu3.3)
           Distro: Linux Mint 18.3 Sylvia
Machine:   System: Hewlett-Packard product: HP Compaq 6910p v: F.0B
           Mobo: Hewlett-Packard model: 30BE v: KBC Version 68.32
           Bios: Hewlett-Packard v: 68MCU Ver. F.0B date: 09/26/2007
CPU:       Dual core Intel Core2 Duo T7300 (-MCP-) cache: 4096 KB
           flags: (lm nx pae sse sse2 sse3 ssse3 vmx) bmips: 7980
           clock speeds: max: 2001 MHz 1: 1600 MHz 2: 1200 MHz
Graphics:  Card: Intel Mobile GM965/GL960 Integrated Graphics Controller (primary)
           bus-ID: 00:02.0
           Display Server: X.Org 1.18.4 drivers: intel (unloaded: fbdev,vesa)
           Resolution: 1280x800@60.00hz
           GLX Renderer: Mesa DRI Intel 965GM x86/MMX/SSE2
           GLX Version: 2.1 Mesa 17.0.7 Direct Rendering: Yes
Audio:     Card Intel 82801H (ICH8 Family) HD Audio Controller
           driver: snd_hda_intel bus-ID: 00:1b.0
           Sound: Advanced Linux Sound Architecture v: k4.10.0-38-generic
Network:   Card-1: Intel 82566MM Gigabit Network Connection
           driver: e1000e v: 3.2.6-k port: 4020 bus-ID: 00:19.0
           IF: enp0s25 state: down mac: <filter>
           Card-2: Intel PRO/Wireless 4965 AG or AGN [Kedron] Network Connection
           driver: iwl4965 v: in-tree: bus-ID: 10:00.0
           IF: wlp16s0 state: up mac: <filter>
Drives:    HDD Total Size: 120.0GB (15.6% used)
           ID-1: /dev/sda model: FUJITSU_MHY2120B size: 120.0GB
Partition: ID-1: / size: 108G used: 16G (16%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/dm-0
           ID-2: /boot size: 472M used: 65M (15%) fs: ext2 dev: /dev/sda1
           ID-3: swap-1 size: 2.13GB used: 0.00GB (0%) fs: swap dev: /dev/dm-1
RAID:      No RAID devices: /proc/mdstat, md_mod kernel module present
Sensors:   System Temperatures: cpu: 60.0C mobo: 56.0C
           Fan Speeds (in rpm): cpu: N/A
Info:      Processes: 214 Uptime: 3 min Memory: 560.7/2004.7MB
           Init: systemd runlevel: 5 Gcc sys: 5.4.0
           Client: Shell (bash 4.3.481) inxi: 2.2.35 
fredrik@fredrik-HP-Compaq-6910p ~ $ 
Best regards
Fredrik

User avatar
Moem
Level 17
Level 17
Posts: 7039
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2015 9:14 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Bad performance

Post by Moem » Thu Jun 21, 2018 2:24 am

fredand44 wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 1:18 am
a) With Xfce is it harder to use the OS than Cinnamin, do I have to be more of a command line expert?
b) With Xfce will I miss some functions that is only available in Cinnamon, like flash-viewer or such?
c) How is it possible that Xfce can perform better? (What is the difference between heavy-weight GUI in Cinnamon, I guess it is called, and light-weight GUI in Xfce? If light-weight is faster why is not Cinnamon using it? Isn't faster always better? ;-))
a) No. It's just as complete as Cinnamon.
b) See above.
c) Mostly: eyecandy. Things like animations that are shown when a window comes up or closes.
Lightweight is faster on a machine that has little RAM; on a machine that has more, Cinnamon runs fine, and yes, it has a polished feel that many people like.

If I were you, I would add some RAM (it's cheap, and it's easy enough to install, and you'll be able to keep using your laptop for longer which is good for the planet) and also try out XFCE. You never know, you may like it better than Cinnamon; it's mostly a matter of personal preference.
Your laptop can run a 64-bits OS; I would do that. 32-bits is going away and there is more and more software that only exists for 64-bits.

Your machine can handle 4GB of RAM instead of the 2GB it has now. You will probably find two 1GB memory strips inside; these would need to be replaced by 2GB strips. The correct type is called SO-DIMM 200-pins. You will love how fast it will feel.
Image

If your issue is solved, kindly indicate that by editing the first post in the topic, and adding [SOLVED] to the title. Thanks!

Hoser Rob
Level 12
Level 12
Posts: 4344
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 8:57 am

Re: Bad performance

Post by Hoser Rob » Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:31 am

fredand44 wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 1:18 am
.,.. With Xfce is it harder to use the OS than Cinnamin, do I have to be more of a command line expert?...
A very strange question from someone who claims to do a lot of programming, but depending on what you want to do, probably not.

User avatar
Reorx
Level 11
Level 11
Posts: 3904
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 7:14 pm
Location: SE Florida, USA

Re: Bad performance

Post by Reorx » Thu Jun 21, 2018 11:39 am

Your machine is about 10 years old - it has served you well but it may be time for some new hardware! Since the machine still works, by all means keep it as a backup or emergency machine. It would be OK to use to install and test LM19 and do some surfing and/or e-mail tossing but maybe not as a production machine for doing real work.

In terms of RAM space, I think 4 GB is the "sweet spot" for most users doing mundane computing. If you are doing tasks that are somewhat RAM intense, you will likely want more RAM - 8GB will serve you well.

Best!
Full time Linux Mint user since 2011 - Currently running LM17C64 on my production machines.
Currently testing LM19C64 - Lookin' good so far!
Image Image

Post Reply

Return to “Installation & Boot”