The Linux Experiment

It’s that time again. Like before I’ve decided to re-run my previous tests this time using the following distributions:

• Debian 6.0 (GNOME)
• Kubuntu 11.10 (KDE)
• Linux Mint 12 (GNOME)
• Linux Mint 201109 LXDE (GNOME)
• Mandriva 2011 (KDE)
• OpenSUSE 12.1 (GNOME)
• OpenSUSE 12.1 (KDE)
• Sabayon 8 (GNOME)
• Sabayon 8 (KDE)
• Sabayon 8 (Xfce)
• Ubuntu 11.10 (Unity)
• Ubuntu 12.04 Beta 2 (Unity)
• Xubuntu 11.10 (Xfce)

I will be testing all of this within VirtualBox on ‘machines’ with the following specifications:

• Total RAM: 512MB
• Hard drive: 8GB
• CPU type: x86 with PAE/NX
• Graphics: 3D Acceleration enabled

The tests were all done using VirtualBox 4.1.0 on Windows 7, and I did not install VirtualBox tools (although some distributions may have shipped with them). I also left the screen resolution at the default (whatever the distribution chose) and accepted the installation defaults. All tests were run between April 2nd, 2012 and April 9th, 2012 so your results may not be identical.

Results

Following in the tradition of my previous posts I have once again gone through the effort to bring you nothing but the most state of the art in picture graphs for your enjoyment.

Things to know before looking at the graphs

First off if your distribution of choice didn’t appear in the list above its probably not reasonably possible to installed (i.e. Fedora 16 which requires 768MB of RAM) or I didn’t feel it was mainstream enough (pretty much anything with LXDE). Secondly there may be some distributions that don’t appear on all of the graphs, for example Mandriva. In the case of Mandriva the distribution would not allow me to successfully install the updates and so I only have its first boot RAM usage available. Finally when I tested Debian I was unable to test before / after applying updates because it seemed to have applied the updates during install. As always feel free to run your own tests.

First boot memory (RAM) usage

This test was measured on the first startup after finishing a fresh install.

Memory (RAM) usage after updates

This test was performed after all updates were installed and a reboot was performed.

Memory (RAM) usage change after updates

The net growth or decline in RAM usage after applying all of the updates.

Install size after updates

The hard drive space used by the distribution after applying all of the updates.

Conclusion

As before I’m going to leave you to drawing your own conclusions.

Once again I’ve decided to re-run my previous tests this time using the following distributions:

• Debian 6.0.2 (GNOME)
• Fedora 15 (GNOME 3 Fallback Mode)
• Fedora 15 (KDE)
• Kubuntu 11.04 (KDE)
• Linux Mint 11 (GNOME)
• Linux Mint 10 (KDE)
• Linux Mint 10 (LXDE)
• Linux Mint 11 (Xfce)
• Lubuntu 11.04 (LXDE)
• Mandriva One (GNOME)
• Mandriva One (KDE)
• OpenSUSE 11.4 (GNOME)
• OpenSUSE 11.4 (KDE)
• Ubuntu 11.04 (GNOME Unity Fallback Mode)
• Xubuntu 11.04 (Xfce)

I will be testing all of this within VirtualBox on ‘machines’ with the following specifications:

• Total RAM: 512MB
• Hard drive: 8GB
• CPU type: x86

The tests were all done using VirtualBox 4.0.6 on Linux Mint 11, and I did not install VirtualBox tools (although some distributions may have shipped with them). I also left the screen resolution at the default 800×600 and accepted the installation defaults. All tests were run on August 14th, 2011 so your results may not be identical.

Results

Following in the tradition of my previous posts I have once again gone through the effort to bring you nothing but the most state of the art in picture graphs for your enjoyment.

Things to know before looking at the graphs

First off none of the Fedora 15 versions would install in 512MB of RAM. They both required a minimum of 640MB and therefore are disqualified from this little experiment. I did however run them in VirtualBox with 640MB of RAM just for comparison purposes. Secondly the Linux Mint 10 KDE distro would not even install in either 512MB or 640MB of RAM, the installer just kept crashing. I was unable to actually get it to work so it was not included in these tests. Finally when I tested Debian I was unable to test before / after applying updates because it seemed to have applied the updates during install.

First boot memory (RAM) usage

This test was measured on the first startup after finishing a fresh install.

Memory (RAM) usage after updates

This test was performed after all updates were installed and a reboot was performed.

Memory (RAM) usage change after updates

The net growth or decline in RAM usage after applying all of the updates.

Install size after updates

The hard drive space used by the distribution after applying all of the updates.

Conclusion

As before I’m going to leave you to drawing your own conclusions.

As a follow up to my previous post I have decided to re-run the tests, this time with the updated distributions (where available of course). Again I will be testing all of this within VirtualBox on ‘machines’ with the following specifications:

• Total RAM: 512MB
• Hard drive: 8GB
• CPU type: x86

The tests were all done using VirtualBox 3.2.6 on Windows, and I did not install VirtualBox tools (although some distributions may have shipped with them). I also left the screen resolution at the default 800×600 and accepted the installation defaults. All tests were run on July 3rd, 2010 so your results may not be identical.

Results

As before I have provide state of the art graphs for your enjoyment.

First boot memory (RAM) usage

This test was measured on the first startup after finishing a fresh install.

Memory (RAM) usage after updates

This test was performed after all updates were installed and a reboot was performed.

Memory (RAM) usage change after updates

The net growth or decline in RAM usage after applying all of the updates

Install size after updates

The hard drive space used by the distribution after applying all of the updates.

Conclusion

As before I’m going to leave you to drawing your own conclusions. I will point out though that almost all of the distributions have done a good job of lowering memory usage with system updates, which is very commendable. Also it’s important to note that even though RAM and disk space increase with updates so might performance so it’s all about which metric you hold as most important.

As you know I am currently running OpenSUSE 11.2 on my laptop. While I have enjoyed my time using it, I have noticed that this particular distribution tends to be on the heavy side of memory usage. This got me thinking. If OpenSUSE uses this much memory on my machine, how could it possibly run on a machine with 512MB of RAM (the lowest recommended amount)? If Ubuntu is the most popular distribution, but it is also, what I would call, a fully-fledged desktop distribution, then how does it manage given tighter memory constraints? And so the mini-experiment begins.

Points to make before I begin

• This is not a very scientific study, but rather something I did in my spare time because I was curious.
• I have picked the majority of the most popular desktop distributions. These distributions were chosen not because they were designed for minimal system specs but rather because they are popular and provide a full desktop experience out of the gate.
• What do I mean by full desktop experience? The distribution should be easy enough for a novice Windows user to install, should come with all of the standard software for desktop activities, and should not require any fine tuning.
• What you won’t find here: DSL, Arch Linux, Slackware (only because it failed at installing in VirtualBox), Gentoo, or other ‘expert’ distributions. You also will not find netbook remixes or low-resource specific distributions. This experiment is designed to see how these big distributions run on little RAM, nothing more.
• Please do not post things like ‘you forgot to test XYZ’ or other useless comments that don’t actually help the discussion. Yes I am sorry I missed your favourite distribution, but grab a tissue, clear the tears from your eyes and let’s all move on with our lives.

How I tested them

The process was identical for all tested distributions. I set up a new virtual machine inside of VirtualBox with the following specs:

• Total RAM: 512MB
• Hard drive: 8GB
• CPU type: x86

The tests were all done using VirtualBox 3.1.4 on Windows, and I did not install VirtualBox tools (although some distributions may have shipped with them) nor did I change the screen resolution from the default 800×600.

Results

I have broken the results down into a variety of categories and included fancy graphs just for you!

First boot memory (RAM) usage

For this test I installed the distribution and then on its first (post-installation) boot measured the amount of memory it used. This was to gauge the amount of resources that the stock distribution required before any updates.

Average first boot memory (RAM) usage by packaging type

This shows the average memory usage broken down by the packing type used.

Memory (RAM) usage after updates

This was a test to see whether or not system updates caused the memory usage to increase or decrease. I updated the system with all current updates and then rebooted and measured the resource usage again.

Memory (RAM) usage change after updates

This graph shows the usage difference between installation and post-updating. The formula I used was [after updates - initial installation].

Average memory (RAM) usage after updates by packaging type

Similar to above. Again this is broken down by packing type.

Filesystem layout

This is a simple graph showing the partitions that each default setup created as well as the relative size of them.

Filesystems used in partitions

This graph shows the different filesystems used for the various partitions. For example if a distribution has a value of 2 under ext4 that means that it used ext4 in two different partitions.

Occurrence of filesystem by packaging type

This graph shows the number of distributions who used a certain type of filesystem. It is broken down by packing type.

Install size after updates

This is the total OS install size after downloading and installing all of the updates. This should represent a fully updated version of the distribution.

Average install size after updates by packaging type

This shows the average install size of the distributions broken down by packing type.

Conclusion

Make you own! …well it is pretty obvious that some of these distributions would perform better than others given these low system specs. There are however other things to consider. For example which packing type you prefer, or for that matter which package manager.