Lite XFCE

[galiban]

Hello guys.

I'm search for an XFCE gnu/linux distribution that uses very little Ram.
In short, a distribution that uses very little ram and runs very few processes (required processes).

It is important that it is Ubuntu or Arch based.

What I've tried;
Xubuntu 22.10 Core (Idle Ram usage 700MB - 900MB)
Linux Lite (idle Ram usage 900MB - 1000MB)
Manjaro XFCE (Idle Ram usage 800MB - 1000MB)
Artix XFCE(Idle Ram usage 700MB - 900MB)

Waiting for your suggestions.

 

[kc1di]

I can tell you PCLinuxOS uses about 700 MB of Ram.
Mx-21 Uses about 900 MB So they are in about the same ballpark that you are see in other Distros.

 

[mrcrossroads]

I'm partial to MX Linux.

 

[KGIII]

These threads make me go through a thought exercise...

Which distro/setup has the least resource usage - under idle, 'cause that's how they measure it?

The thing is, we don't use our computer at idle. We use our devices with open applications and browsers with multiple tabs open.

All-told, they're within a few hundred MB of RAM, give or take a couple. At the end of the day, that is when we're actively using our devices, that difference is pretty minimal.

I'm reminded of the people who spend 45 minutes shaving a few seconds off their boot time.

They'd need to reboot thousands and thousands of times to make up for that 45 minutes they invested in the first place.

 

[Brickwizard]

The smallest I can think of is Tiny Linux minimum requirement 46MB RAM, but you can't do a lot with it, by the time you add a few applications it can easily jump to 250mb [it's by the same guy who worked on the original DSL [damn small linux]

 

[galiban]

The smallest I can think of is Tiny Linux minimum requirement 46MB RAM, but you can't do a lot with it, by the time you add a few applications it can easily jump to 250mb [it's by the same guy who worked on the original DSL [damn small linux]

I dont think i can working Unity3D on your recommend distros .

 

[forester]

Maybe manjaro-xfce-22.0.1-230124-linux61.iso

Suggest tweak the startup defaults to eliminate unnecessary resource usage.

OR -- https://amaikinono.github.io/install-minimal-manjaro.html

 

[Tolkem]

I'm search for an XFCE gnu/linux distribution that uses very little Ram

Alpine Linux

As you can see in the pic above, it's using only 306 MiB. Note that this beauty doesn't ship with any desktop, and you'll have to install that yourself.

You'll need to read here:

Xfce - Alpine Linux

wiki.alpinelinux.org

Just follow those instructions and you'll be set. That said, there's this https://www.adelielinux.org/ It's based off alpine. I haven't used it, so I don't know about resource usage, also, there's no (official) XFCE flavor, but it should be possible to install. There's LXQT, KDE and MATE.
Hope this helps!

 

[osprey]

phanmetal, I wonder whether you've really answered your own question with your requirement:

It is important that it is Ubuntu or Arch based.

since you will surely meet your other requirement:

a distribution that uses very little ram and runs very few processes (required processes).

by installing a basic or minimal Arch or Ubuntu, and then meet your first mentioned requirement:

search for XFCE

by simply installing XFCE on top.

One way of achieving minimal RAM usage, is accomplished by installing a basic or minimal installation and then progressively adding what the user wants, such as X or wayland and then XFCE in your case. In the case of Arch, that's a common approach, but with Ubuntu, it might be more economical to begin with Debian since it underpins Ubuntu, but it may not make much difference there.

The difference in this approach rather than choosing an existing distribution running XFCE, is that the user avoids the overheads and additional programming that the distribution developers have chosen to include in their distro, which they pretty much all do to accomplish particular aims that they have. Their aims however, may not coincide with yours, which in this case is "uses very little Ram". So you have the choice of accepting their versions of a linux system, or making your own depending on how much compromise you are willing to make in relation to RAM usage as you find it.

The main challenge in starting from basics and then adding what you want to the system, is the learning of how to do it, but with packet managers in Arch and Debian, it's greatly assisted.

The least RAM intensive fully-functioning systems I have used are formed from minimal Debian bases and then using suckless utilities like dwm, st and surf. There's no XFCE here, though it can always be installed.

In modern computing, RAM usage has become less of an issue for many users because it's not as expensive as it once was. It's also worth considering that RAM usage in linux is designed to use RAM optimally which means that in many cases it will use as much RAM as there is, if it needs to, but if there wasn't that much of it, its Memory Management processes optimise to use whatever there is so in practical terms it may achieve with less RAM just about what it does with more, but if there is more, it'll use it in accordance with the optimisations built into the kernel. So, essentially, judging systems by the amount of RAM they use can be a fraught matter.

 

[galiban]

phanmetal, I wonder whether you've really answered your own question with your requirement:

since you will surely meet your other requirement:

by installing a basic or minimal Arch or Ubuntu, and then meet your first mentioned requirement:

by simply installing XFCE on top.

One way of achieving minimal RAM usage, is accomplished by installing a basic or minimal installation and then progressively adding what the user wants, such as X or wayland and then XFCE in your case. In the case of Arch, that's a common approach, but with Ubuntu, it might be more economical to begin with Debian since it underpins Ubuntu, but it may not make much difference there.

The difference in this approach rather than choosing an existing distribution running XFCE, is that the user avoids the overheads and additional programming that the distribution developers have chosen to include in their distro, which they pretty much all do to accomplish particular aims that they have. Their aims however, may not coincide with yours, which in this case is "uses very little Ram". So you have the choice of accepting their versions of a linux system, or making your own depending on how much compromise you are willing to make in relation to RAM usage as you find it.

The main challenge in starting from basics and then adding what you want to the system, is the learning of how to do it, but with packet managers in Arch and Debian, it's greatly assisted.

The least RAM intensive fully-functioning systems I have used are formed from minimal Debian bases and then using suckless utilities like dwm, st and surf. There's no XFCE here, though it can always be installed.

In modern computing, RAM usage has become less of an issue for many users because it's not as expensive as it once was. It's also worth considering that RAM usage in linux is designed to use RAM optimally which means that in many cases it will use as much RAM as there is, if it needs to, but if there wasn't that much of it, its Memory Management processes optimise to use whatever there is so in practical terms it may achieve with less RAM just about what it does with more, but if there is more, it'll use it in accordance with the optimisations built into the kernel. So, essentially, judging systems by the amount of RAM they use can be a fraught matter.

For example, Windows 11 uses about 3GB of RAM when idle.
It consumes a lot of RAM and the number of processes is as much as the amount of RAM. This affects the performance of the computer very badly.

Process lag, poor performance in animations, sudden and continuous FPS drops in games...

The same goes for Ubuntu Gnome. It also consumes a lot of memory and has poor performance.

I get less FPS on a lightweight Linux distribution, but compared to Windows 11, FPS drops are very rare and the game is more stable. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Linux is the best at games.


Making a comparison by amount of RAM might be pointless, but in general anything that consumes less RAM is much faster. Because the processes that will use the processor and disk are also less. So I have a performance expectation.

XFCE distributions are also very nice and easy to customize, they easily open up-to-date applications. More support is available for Ubuntu and Arch.