Yeah, I’m currently upgrading our fleet of Windows 10 PCs at work to 11. I haven’t noticed a significant difference either. Nor at home on my desktop or laptop. I think this guy might be affected by a driver bug or something.
Comment on [deleted]
Blaster_M@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Interesting, considering I haven’t noticed… and gaming benchmarks have shown a minimal if any difference in gaming performance between Windows, stripped down Windows, and Linux. You’d have to split hairs to find it.
catloaf@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world 2 months ago
The only time I’ve ever noticed a substantial difference is when enabling Windows’ Virtualization-based security on hardware without support for things like MBEC/GMET.
CannedTuna@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
Idk man. I have a brand new laptop my work got me and I notice it. Windows is just plain bad now. It’s like I go to save a file and the file browser window opens and I’m stuck sitting there waiting for minutes. It’s like I’m suddenly 10 again when you’d turn on your pc, go make breakfast, come back and hope your PC finished booting. Does it both on my work laptop running 11 and my PC at home running 10.
Blaster_M@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Your work laptop may have company spyware on it. That will drag down the performance of the system, especially if it is monitoring absolutely everything.
CannedTuna@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
It doesn’t. I bought it with a company credit card and I don’t let IT touch it. I gotta do a lot of stuff in the field so I don’t have time to call IT every time I need to install a software update update.
The File Explorer behavior is something I’ve been noticing lately. I do have a number of cloud accounts connected for work, 2 One Drive, 1 dropbox, with a shit ton of files and folders (most not sync’d locally) and I wonder if File Explorer is looking through those when it opens.
Blaster_M@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Probably the cloud syncing then. That’s always something that hurts performance. It would take investigating to find out what exactly is doing it.
Note: I’ve used OneDrive, Dropbox, and Nextcloud, and historically, all these services take up a good chunk of resources… Windows, Mac, Linux, you name it. I’ve tried it on them all.
Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
That happens for me only if my network drives are not properly connected. Windows will absolutely take you on that until it’s connected or times out.
Your only way out is to crash explorer.exe
Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 2 months ago
It’s the UI he’s complaining about.
kadu@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I disagree - Linux actually tanks GPU performance if you’re VRAM limited. It’s extremely unfortunate, as many games now have atrocious VRAM usage for no particular reason.
If you’re not limited though, you’re absolutely right, the difference is minimal and generally within margin of error. Some CPU bound games are better on Linux though, in a measurable way, specially if you’re running bleeding edge distros.
pineapplelover@lemm.ee 2 months ago
A good number of games run better on Linux, I bet it will find it obvious on lower specced machines too. I just saw this video today and on Linux, it shows a 10 fps boost for most of the games demonstrated.
Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
Yeah so pretty hard to generalize based on testing one setup. Ask most people with an Nvidia GPU how they like Linux gaming…
pineapplelover@lemm.ee 2 months ago
I think as long as it isn’t the newest nvidia gpu, I’ve heard they’re generally alright if you use the proprietary and non-free drivers.
lemmylommy@lemmy.world 2 months ago
It was pretty bad in the beginning. I suppose they have improved it.
red@sopuli.xyz 2 months ago
You could have read what the article was about, though.
thequantumcog@lemmy.world 2 months ago
You notice it on old hardware. On my Latitude e6220 (i3 2nd gen) there is a night and day performance difference between windows 10 and Linux.
Blaster_M@lemmy.world 2 months ago
As someone with Ivy Bridge hardware that has run Windows 10 amd Ubuntu… I haven’t.
thequantumcog@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I use arch Linux with hyprland WM. System uses 384mb of ram on idle.
Wurzelfurz@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I’m sorry but low RAM usage is not good performance, those are not the same.
Also, I’ve read somewhere that all memory not in use is wasted memory. I find that thought really interesting. If an operating system would be able to always maximize RAM usage by loading every peace of software and information it uses or is about to use without using swap or a pagefile it shoud be more responsive I think.
Blaster_M@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Windows and Linux both heavily use RAM caching, that is, using Unused RAM as a massove disk cache to improve performance - a lot of Windows processes that are “running” are really idling in RAM and not doing anything unless called on. In a way, they’re “cached”.
Almost every problem with Windows running slow out of the box are one of three things:
1: Not enough RAM (stupid super cheap 4-8GB laptops) 2: Not enough storage (stupid super cheap 32-128GB laptops) 3: Installed on a hard drive (install Windows to an SSD, spinny bois are too slow for 2024)
It is true Windows 11 asks for about 5GB RAM, but what else does? Your web browser. The solution is to not be cheap and have at least 16GB RAM, regardless of your OS. You want to have no more than half your RAM used when you’re using your PC. This gives you enough for programs, the disk cache, and room to grow.
Valmond@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Just install win95 !
Or 3.1 😅
Voyajer@lemmy.world 2 months ago
My 3570k very much enjoyed the switch but it’s retired now. I can’t imagine how it would have handled win11 based on the before/after of other computers I use.
stevenm2406@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
Having installed Win11 on a PC with a 3570K it ran just fine. I don’t really see a difference in performance between 10 and 11 on desktops. I have an old ThinkPad with an i5 6300U and performance on that isn’t amazing, but I’ve never used 10 on it (bought it from the company I work for last year) so I don’t know if it doesn’t like 11 or that’s just how it is.
SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
Ubuntu is heavy for a Linux distro, because it uses the heaviest DE (GNOME), uses the less optimized Snap packages, and perhaps has other Canonical telemetry or something.
If you want better performance, try something with a lightweight DE. I have a laptop running Lubuntu (essentially Ubuntu with LXQt instead of GNOME), and it’s actually quite responsive, at least for basic system functions.
Because if you run anything on the web with a 10 year old CPU, it’s gonna suck due to the huge web browsers accompanying the bloated websites. Even on a well optimized website, the browser overhead is significant on bad hardware, especially regarding the launch time of the browser.
Blaster_M@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I prefer and use Lubuntu, before going for Mint XFCE, and now Bazzite (because gaming). However, regardless of DE, because I absolutely pack my systems with RAM, the bottleneck is not the memory, it’s the cpu in cases of old systems.
MakePorkGreatAgain@lemmy.basedcount.com 2 months ago
oof an i3 though. modern winOS doesnt like i3’s
AlternateRoute@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
i3 is just a class the generation matters a lot a current gen i3 is very fast.
Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
That’s why it’s considered, you know, old?
Molecular0079@lemmy.world 2 months ago
How is this relevant? If an OS performs better on old hardware, it’s still an indication that it is more optimized.
Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
If the requirement calls for it, don’t run it on under-specced hardware and expect proper responsiveness.