Would legacy or modern kernel be better for this PC?

Forum Forums Official Releases antiX-23 “Arditi del Popolo Would legacy or modern kernel be better for this PC?

  • This topic has 4 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated May 28-8:39 am by Brian Masinick.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #143702
    Member
    miguel04685

      Is there a difference in performance and/or security between the two kernel types?

      MY PC HAS:
      Memory: 2 GB RAM
      CPU: Intel Celeron E3300 64 bits
      GPU: Intel 82G33/G31 Express Integrated Graphics
      Audio: Intel NM10/ICH7 Family High Definition
      Network: Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet
      Disk: 300 GB HDD with MBR partition style

      • This topic was modified 3 weeks, 1 day ago by miguel04685.
      #143713
      Forum Admin
      rokytnji

        Since we come with both in the full iso. Easy enough for you to check.

        I prefer the runit versions. Just personal preference is all. sysvinit versions are usually pretty stable for new users.

        Just download a full iso. 32 bit or 64 bit. Boot either kernel and start browsing.

        If there is difference. You will notice
        https://antixlinux.com/download/

        You can check out all the posts in what you are running thread also.

        Edit: as far as security goes. I control that with the sites I visit.

        Sometimes I drive a crooked road to get my mind straight.
        I don't suffer from insanity. I enjoy every minute off it.
        Motorcycle racing is rocket science.

        Linux Registered User # 475019
        How to Search for AntiX solutions to your problems

        #143716
        Moderator
        Brian Masinick

          Like @rokytnji I have found my most carefully optimized 64-bit Full runit instance uses between 210-220 MB with just a terminal immediately after boot on my newest hardware.

          On my mid 2010-2020 system I can get it down to around 180 MB, again with runit.

          Testing using init-diversity I don’t have that instance as tightly optimized but again runit generally uses slightly less memory than sysVinit for me.

          I even tried a very nice respin by @calciumsodium using sysVinit instead of runit. It’s a beautiful system but you asked about resources and I find runit slightly more memory conservative across several different tests.

          You may find OpenRC very appealing in spite of slightly greater memory usage;s6-rc and S6-66 are great, run very fast but they use slightly more memory.

          If you are willing to use slightly more memory the performance of every init other than sysVinit will reward you, particularly if you have 4 or more CPUs or concurrent process threads.

          • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 1 day ago by Brian Masinick.
          • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 1 day ago by Brian Masinick.

          --
          Brian Masinick

          #143726
          Member
          sybok

            Regarding security: both 5.10 and 6.1 LTS kernels share projected EOL Dec. 2026, i.e. both kernels can be considered (reasonably) secure up to that time.

            Sources:
            https://kernel.org/category/releases.html
            https://antixlinux.com/antix-23-1-released/

            Performance: (That is) Hard to tell (at least for me), you’d better try (and evaluate) it yourself as @rokytnji pointed out.

            #143736
            Moderator
            Brian Masinick

              Regarding security: both 5.10 and 6.1 LTS kernels share projected EOL Dec. 2026, i.e. both kernels can be considered (reasonably) secure up to that time.

              Sources:
              https://kernel.org/category/releases.html
              https://antixlinux.com/antix-23-1-released/

              Performance: (That is) Hard to tell (at least for me), you’d better try (and evaluate) it yourself as @rokytnji pointed out.

              I haven’t been using the 5.10 series kernels much recently, though I do still have one system where I can test them out. I have, over the years, tested numerous kernels, and though I do not have a ton of statistically significant test results, I definitely have some seat of the pants evaluations, and I even looked at some kernel differences between different distributions and their individual configurations.

              Frankly it was barely even perceptible what those differences were. Over the years, I’ve noticed some systems that appear to be more “responsive” to interactive use; those distributions were generally NOT frequently used for server use, though like everything I’m saying, that is a generalization. The differences in response were very minor; older systems might “pick that up” slightly; newer systems all you might notice is “FAST” versus “SUPER FAST”, again, subjective.

              Server loads are much more likely to be affected by kernel parameters and tuning; again, it’s rarely a large percentage difference regardless of what is being used. That’s based on 2 1/2 decades of use.

              --
              Brian Masinick

            Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
            • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.