MX Linux Forum

autumn wrote: Thu Mar 06, 2025 8:34 am I can only refer back to the obvious that I've already said ... no idea, not tech, trying to post and discuss things with a view to solutions, but all it turns into is deliberate criticising and no reference at all to the issues happening. I made the effort to look things up, yet am supposed to be some kind of tech einstein and know if what I'm reading is 100% right?

Of course you don't need to be a tech einstein, haha :). And it's okay not to know stuff. Discussing about it is exactly the way to check whether you are on the right track. If you post something and say things like "All I know so far is I've seen the article which says more ram equals worse performance, and these pesky issues illustrated above show that to be so", then it's just normal discussion to respond by saying... hey, the article is dealing with a different thing, in a different context, and what you are seeing in your system doesn't "show that to be so", heh. That's what discussion is about. Calmly saying why something isn't the way you think is not personal and not "criticizing" in a negative way. So, yeah, the issue you are seeing is not about the amount of RAM on your machine.

@autumn wrote:

Right now, after reading around more, I'm trying to install an antix version of the kernel

I think that you should reconsider that. Our sister distro, AntiX is aimed at computers that are much older than your rig and I strongly doubt that one of their kernels is going to be of any benefit to you. Your idea of regression could be a good one but an Antix kernel is going too far back. I think instead you should try experimenting with the Liquorix 6.9.12-2 or the 6.6.12-1, both of which were current to when your motherboard was released in Jan 2023.

Edited to add: Before you plunge into an action, ask us first if it's a good move. We have the knowledge and experience to keep you on the right track.

+1 with j2mcgreg ! I think the 6.9.x liquorix is where I would head.

I have had a few strange things on the 6.11 loads, but the 6.9.x and 6.12.x appear to be much better on my 23/24 rigs.

Nokkaelaein wrote: Thu Mar 06, 2025 8:44 am That's what discussion is about. Calmly saying why something isn't the way you think is not personal and not "criticizing" in a negative way. So, yeah, the issue you are seeing is not about the amount of RAM on your machine.

The difference between research and random Googling is the critical thinking used in selecting your citations. More to the point, citing unrelated problems on unrelated systems in unrelated scenarios doesn't achieve much in diagnosing the actual issue, which I think still requires actual profiling of the throughput metrics being referenced here.

Just seen further responses. Thanks @j2mcgreg. Much appreciate pleasant post and good advice. Thanks to @CharlesV also, for the +1. I ended up installing antix 6.1 back then, and machine runs better generally (probably due to running older Mate?), but all the other issues are still there. Given up on them, as it's overwhelming tbh, but just wanted to say thanks.