Need recommendation, which distro on old parents Laptop

[darjeeling]

´Hello,

I would like to ask your recommendation for the best matching Linux distro for my parents old laptop?

First of all, my favorite is Linux Mint, but for my parents an environment like Ubuntu or Elementary OS is probably simpler to use. By the other side I understand that Ubuntu, similar to Windows, does not work very snappy on older hardware?!

Besides, they are using an Acer Aspire 5536, AMD Athlon 64 X2 Processor, 2GB Ram and ATI RadeonHD 3200 graphics card. Currently they are using Windows 7 and it boot time takes them over 2min. My idea was to change the hard disk to HDD and increase the Ram to 4 or even 8Gb.

However, I have heard that specially Athlon processors are not always compatible with Linux.

I really would appreciate any recommendations!

Best Wishes and thanks in advance!
Darjeeling

[jimallyn]

If you decide to put Mint on that computer, make it the XFCE version. It requires less resources than the other versions. And if that doesn't work well for you, try MX. I have installed MX on several older laptops with good results.

[kc1di]

From what you've listed there mint should run on that machine with 4 Gb ram. the only hitch may be the video card some Ati/Radeon card are problematic.

But I have a Lenovo laptop with an AMD processor and it runs mint cinnamon very well. with 4 Gb ram.

Either the Mate or XFCE version would be a bit lighter than Cinnamon though.

Other than that give PCLinuxOS a try in the mate version.

Good Luck

P.S. Of course you can always try the live disk of many of the Distros that would give you an indication of any problems before you install.

[daveinuk]

Recommendation requests will make your headache worse if you didn't have one already, everyone gives a different opinion so they're largely pointless, people only have your spec's top go off - but based on that, I wouldn't spend any money on RAM if they're just surfing etc, get a few burnt to USB and let THEM have a look and a try. As for which, having done several old and low spec laptops before - Mint MATE, MInt XFCE, and if they don't suit for any reason, ZorinOS or Elementary.

There's more than you can shake a stick at, with not enough difference in some, but you can't say you've got no choice !

Good luck

[gold_finger]

Have a look through this thread: GNU/Linux Versions Performance Comparison (older hardware). Normally I would automatically recommend either Xfce or Mate in your case. However, after reading that thread it sounds like you may not have much problem with Cinnamon and/or KDE either (much to my surprise). Try the 32-bit version of each DE. Maybe they'll all work fine and they can just pick the one that "looks and feels" best to them.

A couple of other alternatives to Mint:

• Linux Lite -- Ubuntu-based distro using Xfce DE specifically aimed at new users from Windows.
• Anti-X -- Debian-based distro, very lightweight, relatively easy to use, but not as easy as Mint or Linux Lite.

[exploder]

I would burn them some disks and let them decide what they like best. That hardware is still pretty darn decent, with a memory upgrade it could easily run any modern distro using any desktop environment. Memory is cheap and worth the investment.

[ofb]

Mint MATE 17.2 runs perfectly fine on this similar desktop:

Code: Select all

n@glam ~ $ inxi -Fxz
System:    Host: glam Kernel: 3.16.0-38-generic x86_64 (64 bit, gcc: 4.8.2) 
           Desktop: MATE 1.10.0  Distro: Linux Mint 17.2 Rafaela
Machine:   Mobo: ASUSTek model: M2NBP-VM CSM version: 1.xx Bios: Phoenix version: ASUS M2NBP-VM CSM 0301 date: 09/26/2006
CPU:       Dual core AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ (-MCP-) cache: 1024 KB flags: (lm nx sse sse2 sse3 svm) bmips: 4018.1 
           Clock Speeds: 1: 1000.00 MHz 2: 1000.00 MHz
Graphics:  Card: NVIDIA GF119 [GeForce GT 520] bus-ID: 03:00.0 
           X.Org: 1.15.1 drivers: nouveau (unloaded: fbdev,vesa) Resolution: 1280x1024@60.0hz 
           GLX Renderer: Gallium 0.4 on NVD9 GLX Version: 3.0 Mesa 10.1.3 Direct Rendering: Yes
Audio:     Card-1: NVIDIA MCP51 High Definition Audio driver: snd_hda_intel bus-ID: 00:10.1 
           Card-2: NVIDIA GF119 HDMI Audio Controller driver: snd_hda_intel bus-ID: 03:00.1 
           Sound: Advanced Linux Sound Architecture ver: k3.16.0-38-generic
Network:   Card-1: NVIDIA MCP51 Ethernet Controller driver: forcedeth port: c800 bus-ID: 00:14.0
           IF: eth0 state: down mac: <filter>
           Card-2: Qualcomm Atheros AR5212/AR5213 Wireless Network Adapter driver: ath5k bus-ID: 04:09.0
           IF: wlan0 state: up mac: <filter>
Drives:    HDD Total Size: 1500.3GB (28.1% used) 1: id: /dev/sda model: WDC_WD5000AAKS size: 500.1GB 
           2: id: /dev/sdb model: ST31000528AS size: 1000.2GB 
Partition: ID: / size: 457G used: 394G (91%) fs: ext4 ID: /boot size: 236M used: 126M (57%) fs: ext2 
           ID: swap-1 size: 2.14GB used: 0.00GB (0%) fs: swap 
RAID:      No RAID devices detected - /proc/mdstat and md_mod kernel raid module present
Sensors:   None detected - is lm-sensors installed and configured?
Info:      Processes: 180 Uptime: 8:52 Memory: 968.5/2000.4MB Runlevel: 2 Gcc sys: 4.8.4 
           Client: Shell (bash 4.3.11) inxi: 1.9.17 

I had 3GB RAM in it. I took the third stick out for another machine because you never notice the difference on daily tasks. Really.

However, I have heard that specially Athlon processors are not always compatible with Linux.

You are probably thinking of the plain Athlon and Athlon XP - some time ago they lost support for Flash in Linux. This has nothing to do with your later Athlon 64 X2.

One detail -- The integrated ATI RadeonHD 3200 of that Acer is rather weak. Also being integrated, it'll be using system RAM. I consider 2GB to be a happy minimum, but minimum, so for the laptop I expect an extra stick would help. But I wouldn't expect noticing any increases beyond 2.5GB.

...

Try the 32-bit version of each DE.

Has there been benchmarking that shows this is worthwhile?

[gold_finger]

However, I have heard that specially Athlon processors are not always compatible with Linux.

Well answered by ofb here:

You are probably thinking of the plain Athlon and Athlon XP - some time ago they lost support for Flash in Linux. This has nothing to do with your later Athlon 64 X2.

gold_finger wrote:Try the 32-bit version of each DE.



Has there been benchmarking that shows this is worthwhile?

Honestly, I don't know. I'm really just repeating what seems to be commonly recommended for computers with less than 3-4GB of RAM. It's entirely possible that 64-bit version will have no noticeable performance difference. I believe it natively uses slightly more RAM in operation than 32-bit systems, but with 2GB of RAM that might not be a big deal.

[ofb]

Honestly, I don't know. I'm really just repeating what seems to be commonly recommended for computers with less than 3-4GB of RAM. It's entirely possible that 64-bit version will have no noticeable performance difference. I believe it natively uses slightly more RAM in operation than 32-bit systems, but with 2GB of RAM that might not be a big deal.

Ah, okay.

If it's just a RAM item, then I concur that with 2GB of RAM it may not be a big deal.

Be nice to track it down. Could well be one of those *nix truths that has outlived its truthfulness.

FWIW I trialled RAM size on some P4 boxes a couple of years ago. There was noticeable difference up to 1.5GB, then the benefit falls off. 2GB turned out to give good headroom for having too much open across four workspaces. I'm still surprised removing the 3rd GB goes unnoticed. Turned out adding it to a friend's U12.04 work machine also went unnoticed. It's just not the bottleneck or help one expects.

[darjeeling]

Test results:
Cold boot - GRUB 2 to desktop
Xfce: 45 sec
Cinnamon: 56 sec

Launch Firefox
Xfce: 8 sec
Cinnamon: 8-9 sec

Launch LibreOffice Writer
Xfce: 6 sec
Cinnamon: 6-7 sec

Good info! But for me 1 minute boot time and 8-9 seconds to open Firefox is really long !!

[darjeeling]

Thanks for all your comments. I will definitely try Xfce and probably also Elementary Freya.

Btw, I really would be interested but I´ve noticed that no one recommended me Ubuntu. ...for some special reason?

[gold_finger]

Good info! But for me 1 minute boot time and 8-9 seconds to open Firefox is really long !!

1. Start time varies depending on the computer. Older, slower computers take longer. Yours may be significantly faster than one used on those tests.

2. These are measures of the initial startup of applications. Don't know if you've ever noticed, but the first time you start something will usually take longer than starting again after that. Boot your computer fresh and start browser. Then close browser and restart it a few minutes later. See the difference?

[BlackVeils]

Linux Lite and LXLE are aimed at being easy to use, and lightweight, i think they tweak it for better compatibility with older hardware too. so this is what i recommend for you to look at.

Linux Lite
https://www.linuxliteos.com/

LXLE
http://lxle.net/about/

[BigEasy]

Besides, they are using an Acer Aspire 5536, AMD Athlon 64 X2 Processor, 2GB Ram and ATI RadeonHD 3200 graphics card. Currently they are using Windows 7 and it boot time takes them over 2min. My idea was to change the hard disk to HDD and increase the Ram to 4 or even 8Gb.

However, I have heard that specially Athlon processors are not always compatible with Linux.

Good computer for any 32bit OS. But laptop... Can be different not working things. Try Mint Mate first anyway.

[Dave B]

Test results:
Cold boot - GRUB 2 to desktop
Xfce: 45 sec
Cinnamon: 56 sec

Launch Firefox
Xfce: 8 sec
Cinnamon: 8-9 sec

Launch LibreOffice Writer
Xfce: 6 sec
Cinnamon: 6-7 sec

Good info! But for me 1 minute boot time and 8-9 seconds to open Firefox is really long !!

Hi darjeeling,

Thanks.

Please don't assume all older systems will take so long, boot and software launch times are slower on that particular netbook since it only has an 1.5Gb/s SATA interface, and only supports IDE (rather than AHCI) drive setting in the BIOS. Due to those restrictions, even a fast SSD doesn't really make much difference.

Netbook with Atom CPU - 17.2 Cinnamon 32-bit
Cold boot: GRUB 2 - Desktop (welcome screen disabled)
HDD: 57s
SSD: 44s

Launch GIMP
HDD: 16-17s
SSD: 14-15s

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Direct comparison
Newer i7 laptop (2012) - 17.2 Cinnamon 64-bit
This system supports read-cache and pre-load
Cold boot: GRUB 2 - Desktop (welcome screen disabled)
SSD: 11s

Launch Firefox
SSD: 2-3s (Firefox starts bit slower since version 40)

GIMP
SSD: 2s

David