| cn::de::es::fr::gr::hu::it::ja::kr::nl::pl::pt::ru::se::us::vn:: |
Homepage > Components and HowTos / PuppyVersionIndex Puppy Version
Which Puppy Linux is best on slower media?
One specification that plays a large part in system performance is the amount of ram available but because puppy is often run from a USB stick their will be a large performance difference between running puppy on a USB 2.0 stick vs a USB 3.0 stick. A USB 2.0 (year 2000) stick will give 35 to 60 MB/s of signalling speeds (slightly slower than UltraATA (66 to 100 MB/s) hard drives (Year 2002)).
A USB 3.0 stick can give 4 Gbit/s of signally speed [1] and is equivalent to about SATA 3. Both SATA 3 and and USB 3.0 were available in 2008. Both types of storage media give about a 100x speed improvement over USB 2.0.
If you are running puppylinux on a fast storage medium (USB 3.0 or SATA) then you can likely get by running even the latest version of Puppy Linux on a small amount of RAM. For instance the puppylinux.org blog suggests the following system specs:
Minimum System Requirements: 1000MHz CPU 768MB RAM
Recommended: 1600MHz 1gb RAM
However, if ran from a USB 2.0 stick then these specs may be insufficient (See discussion here & here) given that USB 2.0 is 100x slower then USB 3.0.
Here are some alternative ram specs if someone is running puppylinux from a media with slow write speeds (e.g. USB 2.0)
Puppy on Slow Write Media (USB 2.0 or Ultra ATA)
You have 4GB of ram or more (~2012 or newer) then first try:
- Xenialpup Pup CE, Was officially released as Xenialpup 7.5 on December 4, 2017 and is Currently the newest official version of puppylinux.
- Slack 7 (Under Development).
You have 2GB of ram to 3GB (~2010 to 2011 hardware) then first try:
- Xenialpup pup w/ older 4.1 Kernal (Form Thread).
You have 1GB to 2GB of Ram (~2007 to 2009 hardware) then first try:
- Tahrpup, originally released in 2014 is a fairly recent version of puppylinux which runs well on old hardware and was updated as recently as 2017-Feb-15. 32bit and 64bit versions are available and it works with a wide variety of kernels.
- Tahrpup is one of the puppy6 Puppy 6] generation version of puppylinux. Another version of puppy6 (e.g. Slaco 6x) may be used in lieu of Tahrpup. Check the puppylinux forums to see which Puppy 6 versions have been most recently updated.
You have 750Mb to 1.25GB of Ram (~2004 to 2006 Hardware) then first try:
- Lucid Revitalized
- Lucid is a Puppy5Index Puppy 5 version. In Lieu of "Lucid Revitalized" check the form for recent updated versions of Puppy 5 (or Racy) if one is looking for a simmilar era pup to try in Leu of Lucid (e.g. Slaco 5X).
You have 250Mb to 750Mb of Ram (1.8 CPU or similar ~ Year 2005 [1]) then first try:
- The recommended minimum ram for wary Wary is 521mb (1.8 CPU or similar). Suggested Maximum 750mb[2], however it will work with less than 256MB of ram in frugal mode if set to not run in ram. A swap file may also be required depending on the application. Wary was a long time supported pup and remained quite popular well beyond the support life of Wary (Last ISO Date: 2013-Mar-02).
- A version of Puppy3 Puppy 3 (Last Updated 2014) or Puppy432 Puppy 4.3.2 (Last Updated Nov 2014) may also be suitable for this range of computer specs.
2005 to 2008
Once we get to old enough hardware (approximately ~2005 to 2008), then puppy linux is much more likely to be installed on media with slower write speeds (like USB 2.0 or serial ATA). in which case we can revert to WhatPuppyLinuxIsBestForYou historicaly recommended ram specs (less than 512MB ram min for Wary). This likely assumes the user is running a very light weight browser and very little if any client side scripting in the browser. Pehaps they are running Dillo for instance or at lease using something light weight (like pale-moon) and using soething to minimize the use of client side scripting (like no script).
Notes
1. USB speeds per https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=USB&oldid=817301447 . Write speeds may be slower and not all sticks are created equal. For instance a zednet article notes that so USB 3.0 sticks are as slow as USB 2.0 sticks. http://www.zdnet.com/article/usb-2-0-and-3-0-in-the-real-world/ Perhaps this is false advertising?
Categories
CategoryComponentCategoryHardware
