Q4OS vs Antix vs MX linux vs Debian 12 (based on performance and functionality on older Machine from 2007)
Posted by Lavrez@reddit | linux | View on Reddit | 12 comments
I have a 2007 old hardware - Dell Vostro 1400 with T7500@2.2 GHz processor, 4GB RAM (upgraded from 2GB), and a 128MB NVIDIA 8400M GS graphics card. This used to perform exceptionally well on Windows XP. Since Windows is longer option for this hardware, I tried several Linux distributions and settled on Debian 12 due to its stability. My main issue was with the NVIDIA driver, which forced me to switch distributions frequently. I resolved the NVIDIA driver issue on Debian with help from Ubuntu forums. However, I still didn't feel at home despite trying many desktop environments and window managers.
I continued searching and eventually settled on AntiX. AntiX could stream videos at 1080p, which is amazing, as I was only looking for stable 480p or 720p online video playback on YouTube. Everything felt smooth on AntiX. I always use Microsoft Edge for streaming videos and other web-related activities, so whatever the OS, it must be able to run Microsoft Edge. This was the main reason I had to migrate from Windows XP. While AntiX resolved performance and functionality issues, I still didn't feel at home.
So, I continued searching for more Linux distributions ended up installing MX Linux. It couldn't compete with AntiX on this laptop's hardware specifications. Finally, I found Q4OS with Trinity. It seemed to be the perfect balance of everything for this hardware. I was using AntiX on SysVinit, and although it was snappy, I felt I had to make a few compromises due to SysVinit. Q4OS Trinity can play live streams at 1080p without lags on this hardware, even with Systemd. In my opinion, Q4OS is worth a try.
As my hardware struggled with Linux MX - Linux Mint, Fedora, Ubuntu, and many others were not considered . Also tiny versions of Linux that can run in RAM were ignored due to functionality issues and lack of Microsoft Edge browser support. With Arch Linux and others, there is steep learning curve. Antix and Q4OS(trinity) are options that work without much hassle. If your hardware is from around 2007 and supports a 64-bit OS, can try these two to get the best performance with functionality in my opinion.
Conclusion: Q4OS (trinity) is best optimised operating system for older hardwares.
anttovar@reddit
antiX runs in 32bits. Last time I booted it, after full boot, with conky on the desktop, it was using LESS than 100MB of RAM. Any other?
64bits version uses 130MB, not a lot, anyway.
It doesn't lose the configuration, but to config the desktop you have to edit files.
vmcrash@reddit
I also like Q4OS/Trinity - mostly because of its Windows-retro-look. Finally I use now Void Linux on my old Core2Duo Notebook with 2GB RAM. But I don't have the Microsoft Edge requirement.
Puzzleheaded_Law_242@reddit
I recently got an Amilo (core2Duo E8300) to install Linux on. The problem was that no distro with conman allowed a stable WiFi configuration. With a manual installation from the network manager, this worked with any distro based on runint/sysint. So I'm not returning a laptop. Q4OS works with systemD. Everything runs fine. Trinity is a bit "strange," but very smooth. Of course, XFCE or Plasma also works. On my 2009 core2Duo (p9700), MX XFCE runs very well. On my main computer, an HP G Series laptop, MX with plasma. Antix IceWM is usually my first choice for core2Duo laptops. Q4OS is a very good alternative.
Dwedit@reddit
MX Linux's big draw is that it has the features of antiX (like USB booting, frugal installation, remastering, etc...) while also being fully compatible with Debian packages. If you're doing a regular installation to a drive, and not using any of the features that revolve around a read-only compressed root filesystem, then it has less to offer. Just the alternative package management tools and repositories, and no systemd.
jlobodroid@reddit
I have some old notebooks and netbook, I loved Q4OS, buis to heavy for a old old one, so I tested AntiX, but I didnt like it, no (easy) permanent configuration, then I tested MXLinux, I liked a lot, and some days ago I tested Devuan in a netbook, Atom64 2Giga, the machine is very very week, but I liked. I'll suggest Devuan / MXLinux / Q4OS /Q4OS Plasma.
Just curious, what is your geekbench mark (single/multi core)?
Lavrez@reddit (OP)
thank you for the suggestion . i'll try Devuan . I have already tried MXLinux . https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/11338337
jlobodroid@reddit
Multi core 335, mine is weak multicore 103, I think Devuan can be a good choice
TheRealEkimsnomlas@reddit
My "cafe" laptop is a crummy Dell chromebook with AntiX shoved into its tiny 14gb guts. It doesn't fly, but it's the snappiest thing I've loaded on there.
crashorbit@reddit
Just a couple thoughts on distgro hopping.
As always, I'm just some idiot on the intertubes so what do I know. YMMV.
Peace.
Lavrez@reddit (OP)
you are right . with video my observation differs from yours . but it is just observation. On all systems inititally i experienced the operating system with default video drivers without installing nvidia video drivers . i guess your observation skills are much better.
johncate73@reddit
I have some older laptops of similar specs and have found that antiX and Q4OS both work very well. MX is best used with anything from the first-gen Core i-series on up. It's worth noting that both antiX and MX are developed by some of the same people, with antiX designed to be lighter than MX. (The "MX" moniker is actually because it is a collaboration between the MEPIS community and antiX after MEPIS was orphaned by its founder.)
Lavrez@reddit (OP)
That is why i tried MX linux . Expected similar performance like Antix but with systemd. finally Q4OS matched this expectation.