Forum rules
Do not post support questions here. Before you post read the forum rules. Topics in this forum are automatically closed 6 months after creation.
1GB RAM (2GB recommended for a comfortable usage).
Some data:
My free -h command outputs (sum of used+shared memory):
boot + terminal opened = 700 MB
Firefox with 1 tab (Linux Mint website) + terminal + text editor = 1040 MB
Firefox with 2 tabs (Linux Mint website + webmail) + terminal + text editor = 1450 MB
Firefox with 3 tabs (Linux Mint website + webmail + Spotify playing music) + terminal + text editor = 1560 MB
Firefox with 3 tabs (Linux Mint website + webmail + Spotify playing music) + terminal + text editor + LibreOffice Writer = 1700 MB
Firefox with 3 tabs (Linux Mint website + webmail + Youtube playing video) + terminal + text editor + LibreOffice Writer = 1770 MB
Firefox with 1 tab (Youtube playing video) + Thunderbird + terminal + text editor = 1670 MB
But this is a light use, some people use heavier apps and open 5 or more browser tabs, listen to music and do other things at the same time.
1 GB RAM is absurd, 2 GB RAM is not reasonable because LM Cinnamon uses 1/3 of this just to boot, 4 GB RAM is more reasonable for most people. I think these numbers should be updated to be more realistic and prevent users from having a bad experience: - Minimum: 2 GB RAM
- Recommended: 4 GB RAM
Last edited by LockBot on Wed Dec 28, 2022 7:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason:Topic automatically closed 6 months after creation. New replies are no longer allowed.
Yeah, that doesn't make any sense either. Ubuntu recommends 2 GB but later the text says 4 GB(https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Insta ... quirements). Which is absurd too, if you try to use Ubuntu GNOME with 4 GB you will have a horrible experience. I have 8 GB and a CPU capable of 3.3 GHz + GPU and Ubuntu is slow.
Every system needs to be more realistic, we are in 2018, things changed, 2 GB RAM made sense 5 years ago, not today.
ssspace wrote: ⤴Fri Jul 06, 2018 11:59 pm
I think these numbers should be updated to be more realistic and prevent users from having a bad experience: - Minimum: 2 GB RAM
- Recommended: 4 GB RAM
I agree. Maybe you want to say that to the developers? They rarely use the forums.
If your issue is solved, kindly indicate that by editing the first post in the topic, and adding [SOLVED] to the title. Thanks!
ssspace wrote: ⤴Fri Jul 06, 2018 11:59 pm
I think these numbers should be updated to be more realistic and prevent users from having a bad experience: - Minimum: 2 GB RAM
- Recommended: 4 GB RAM
I agree. Maybe you want to say that to the developers? They rarely use the forums.
If you or someone could contact them that would be awesome, thanks.
ssspace wrote: ⤴Fri Jul 06, 2018 11:59 pm
I think these numbers should be updated to be more realistic and prevent users from having a bad experience: - Minimum: 2 GB RAM
- Recommended: 4 GB RAM
+1
I guess if you just want to load the desktop to enjoy the view and take a snapshot, you can get away with 1 GB as the absolute minimum. Of course swap can broaden the view somewhat
ssspace wrote: ⤴Sat Jul 07, 2018 9:20 am..........................
Which is absurd too, if you try to use Ubuntu GNOME with 4 GB you will have a horrible experience.................
My ASUS with 4gB RAM was intolerably slow for me with 18.3 Cinnamon.
The addition of 8gB for a total of 12gB and 500gB SSD has now made it usable for me.
My backup laptop, Acer Aspire 5253 with 2gB RAM and 1.3mHz CPU cannot even handle MATE.
Tried that, it crawled to load up the desktop.
Total erase and installed XCFE and it is relatively speedy, as long, as, I only have two tabs open in Firefox, and Terminal and Ted.
Forget using LibreOffice, ain't gonna happen. So, the Aspire is going to have more RAM added and when I can, will add a SSD to replace the very slow spinning disk.
ssspace wrote: ⤴Fri Jul 06, 2018 11:59 pm
I think these numbers should be updated to be more realistic and prevent users from having a bad experience: - Minimum: 2 GB RAM
- Recommended: 4 GB RAM
I agree. Maybe you want to say that to the developers? They rarely use the forums.
If you or someone could contact them that would be awesome, thanks.
I suspect they have bigger fish to fry. Besides, you ALWAYS double minimum system requirements.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong - H. L. Mencken
An alternative is to remove the "Minimum" and just leave the "Recommended" specs.
When you use a software/game you want to know what you need to have a good experience, you don't want someone telling you "well, it runs but is slow, it takes 5 minutes to do that and it's very sluggish".
To be honest, Windows and all Linux distros need 4 GB RAM nowadays, if you have less than that it's going to be painful to use.
I'm running Linux Mint 19 Cinnamon on an Asus A53U, 1.6 GHZ. Radeon graphics, 4GB Ram, 300GB drive(not SSD) and it runs great. Cinnamon is snappier and the overall feeling is fast.
System requirements are always the absolute minimum. There is nothing wrong with the minimums provided.
I don't get the point of this? Every system I have known since windows 95 has stated the minimum required to load and run it - perhaps we should be pedantic and start changing it to recommended, but then some would find fault with that as well
System requirements are always the absolute minimum. There is nothing wrong with the minimums provided.
I don't get the point of this? Every system I have known since windows 95 has stated the minimum required to load and run it - perhaps we should be pedantic and start changing it to recommended, but then some would find fault with that as well
I would find fault with it, because it would misrepresent the actual requirements.
2 GB RAM are more than enough for e.g. my mother to check her emails, do some web surfing and watch some streams. Now if I tried to run a big database server or load the newest 3D video game with just 2 GB RAM that's a different story entirely, but at that point it's the responsibility of the user to check their software's system requirements.
Also it would look weird for Mint to be the only system out there to have inflated requirements. Users shopping for a new operating system might disregard it based on those numbers alone.
