Kernel scheduling algorithm and X.Org performance

Cameron hiryu at
Fri Sep 2 08:54:10 PDT 2005

On Friday September 2 2005 12:54 pm, Dmitry M. Shatrov wrote:
> And that's true. I'd like to add that one does not have to go too far to
> find a "more interactive" system that runs X. I still remember how
> FreeBSD 4.7 felt a lot better than RedHat 7.3 in terms of GNOME and KDE
> responsibility. And it may still feel better, I just had no chance to
> look at FreeBSD 5.x releases yet. I didn't think about the reasons at
> that time and just concluded that BSD code is more mature that Linux,
> but now I think that the main reason was a different process scheduler
> that occasionally performed better with X Windows.
My experiences have been the exact opposite. X has been a lot more responsive 
for me starting from Linux 2.2 and FreeBSD 3.x through Linux 2.6 and FreeBSD 
5. In fact, Linux 2.4 running KDE 3.0.0 was noticibly more responsive than 
FreeBSD 4.x running Window Maker (yes, on the same hardware). But I've also 
heard of other people having better responsiveness in X on FreeBSD. So I 
suspect this is more likely a case of YMMV between the two OS's/kernels.

Just thought that might be something worth noting.


> _______________________________________________
> xorg mailing list
> xorg at

More information about the xorg mailing list