Have you read Garuda's statement on memory usage? They say they try to use as much as possible, as it costs nothing to give up RAM but speeds everything up until it's needed elsewhere. So the fact that Garuda has both the highest memory usage, as well as some of the best app response and performance scores, is not contradictory, it's what you should expect.
that's the same statement arch Linux in general makes though, and it's not about actually using the RAM, but reserving it. There's no reason for a kernel to not reserve memory for itself except for usage statistics and virtual machines. (because it needs to be reserved to be used by either the kernel or a userspace program) Arch Linux (the kernel) as I understand it reserves slightly more than it needs whenever the currently reserved memory is filled, so htop can still show a vaguely correct usage statistic.
Garuda is also the only distro that ships with a significantly different custom kernel (zen), which explains why it was the outlier in several of the tests.
All distros here perform virtually the same so this is my recommendation for new users: Arch: If you want minimal and total control of your linux. The installation is not that hard but it takes some times to do. Manjaro: If you want easy installation and don't want to deal with Arch's "quirks." It has its own package repository that promises stability. Garuda: If you want easy installation and use the Arch repository directly. Also if you want a cool looking desktop OOTB. Endeavour: Same as Garuda but without the performance tweaks which are mostly negligible.
Which is also true for most linux distros out there. You just end up choosing one because of your software needs (one distro has something that the rest dont have, or gets update more frequently) or admin needs (package management is easier, or you are just more used to it). I moved from Slackware to RedHat to Mandrake to Debian, and now I use Debian, as it covers all my needs. If software is not available for it, docker is now a solution that allows you to install it without having to make your own debian package.
@@eckee I agree. When you get more confident with arch based distros you can always switch later. As for me I have, Garuda's Chaotic AUR rupo enabled on my Manjaro install and I run a modified Kernal from that repo (linux-tkg-muqss) and their modified wine-staging build which together adds some extra frames for gaming on my machine (10% faster with some games). Their Manjaro Architect installer is amazing (best intaller I've used) and allows BTRFS with Timeshift pretty easily. So you can go to Manjaro's testing repos pretty safely and just go back to an earlier snapshot if anything breaks (which it hasn't for the most part).
gentooLTO might show a slight performance increase but that's not really the point of Gentoo, it's to customize your binaries to match whatever your use-case is.
Fantastic work. Thank you for making such a detailed comparison. I have expected more discrepancies between these distributions, and it was really interesting to see how close they are most of the time, and then - they weren't!
Loved Manjaro but now I'm a big fan of Endeavour OS because it's basicaly a real Arch Linux with good tools to install and setup. The performance is awesome.
@@TomFoolery9001 Based purely on my experience (Manjaro 2014-2020, Arch 2021-2022) Arch is breaking significantly less, plus has more straight forward approach to kernel updates where you just picking between kernel, kernel-lts and kernel-zen, while in Manjaro there is a whole tool to install different kernels, which is a bit of mess. In addition to that Manjaro team can postpone updates for 2-3 months especially during DE update cycles like new Plasma release or new Gnome release. And another good thing is that AUR packages usually correlate to the Arch packages versioning, and can break on Manjaro due to delay in updates delivery.
I really respect all of these distros but for daily driver and ease to use I prefer the manjaro, is the most polished Linux distro based on arch, even if there are small gap in speed between the distro, at least on my high specs machine is not noticeable. Again thank you for your great videos and your efforts to presents to us the best Linux videos in best quality and content. I'm following you from middle east 👍
I would argue that Garuda is just as polished, but for a different audience. I run Manjaro on my work PC, and Garuda on a gaming PC. Both are easy to install and use, and are very good at meeting the needs of their target audience without the need to tweak the OS.
I knew Garuda wouldn't be the best for a speed test, especially running Dra60nized, beauty isn't free, I was more shocked a few operations Garuda was in the top 2.
*dr460nized But no, GUI elements do not usually impact I/O performance (unless they effectively crash the system), and in those Garuda was at the very bottom.
I don't know about the benchmarks, but personally I've felt like when it comes to actual performance, Garuda is very smooth. And, it's one of the most sexiest Linux distro, so who cares 🤷♂😂
librewish and dragonfire are main heros behind Garuda. Also Naman, TNE, SGS, petsam, tbg and many more team members done great work on Garuda. Salute to whole team.
I have given up on Garuda. I am not complaining but I am indeed sad about it. I want to use Garuda and recommend non-tech users to adopt it as well. I am a Linux user since 12 years. Used so many distros and none broke as often and as much as Garuda. Its updates break the system every 2-3 weeks. I have never had this much trouble over the decade of using Mint, Pop, Ubuntu, Zorin, Elementary. And all of this on an install that was not tweaked at all, all default settings and minimum installed apps!! IDK why Garuda is so prone to breaking. Seems worse than a pre-alpha, almost like a just-compiled first try kinda level of broken-ness! Linux is supposed to be robust and it indeed is. If Garuda is someone's first experience of Linux I don't they think they will ever try again. You do something wrong and it breaks then you can revert what you did, but if the OS update itself breaks the system, doesn't it make you question well why didn't the devs test it? Seriously nothing much installed other than GIMP, Firefox and Asian Fonts. How can such a default install break so often?
@@Swanicorn most distros don't offer bleeding edge updates and have much larger teams working on testing, no matter what distro u use bleeding edge is always risky and garuda does the best at it revert and wait for few days till new releases come and issues get fixed
@Kushen De SilvaI never said I am comparing Arch based. The question is about stability and usability. I am currently using Manjaro and that is also so much more stable than Garuda. Been 2 weeks and no issues so far. I am comparing Operating system stability as a parameter. Here's the most stupidest thing Garuda does that isn't breaking the system but annoying: You install Garuda fresh. And there it is the most beautiful and most snappy distro ever.. You want to forever use it. Then you are on Firefox and you watch some RUclips, do some study. Use the system for 6 hours, no other customisation, just use it like a normal person. You restart the system next day and that pretty little panel up top that says Garuda Linux and has a small green 🐉? Well it gets replaced by a square as in unrecognised font. How dumb is that? Right on the main screen. It is like the shiny gold coating was so thin it wore off in one use. A bunch of small things like that even before the system stops booting to desktop is enough reason to quit it, cuz it makes you question the quality.
@Faiz Ahmed A few months (3-4 ish) ago they made some changes and now it is indeed decent. I do not have any complaints with it now other than maybe the sweet candy beautyline theme getting a bit stale. Other than that the forum has grown a lot, good answers, they pin some helpful articles. Their guide on how to fix the recent gpg key errors was well written, easy to follow and understand. Back when I was sad about it, Garuda was indeed pretty broken. If you can find it on their forum, find a question about pamac not showing thumbnail icons. Look at how hostile that conversation got between the mods and whoever asked that question. It was an easy fix but they just kept denying the issue.
@Black Future I still think it is Garuda's fault. What you are saying is true but in case of Garuda it is more their fault than Arch. Why? Well if you have used both Arch and Garuda you'd know how highly customised Garuda is, causing things to break. Also how is it wrong of me to expect a stable experience? If I want cutting edge Arch I will use actual Arch. If I am using an Arch based distro, how is it wrong of me to expect the Devs do some testing? Why else should they call it their distro? How is that incorrect to expect? It is fairly easy to do as well you know? For example in Pacman config file, if you place custom repos above arch repos, the update gets pulled from custom repo instead of the arch one if it breaks. Some distros have even done this and even though some packages exist in AUR, they get maintained by the distro's custom repo. A perfect example of this is Arcolinux, arch based, but the developer is so on top of breakage that a fix/address is issued almost same day.
I must say that my experience on a 2014 thinkpad with an SSD and 8 gigs of RAM was that Garuda was noticeably more stable and snappier than Manjaro. Possibly Manjaro might work better on a lower-specced machine though.
Excellent video. I really liked. Can you do the same with debian-based distributions? Elementary, Mint, Ubuntu and, of course, Debian! That will be an interesting video as well. Edit: After the tests you could make a comparison between Arch-based and Debian-based results
For how highly touted EndeavourOS is, real world usage like booting and USB transfer looking much better on my preferred OS Manjaro! Thank you for the comparison
Thanks for this video. As a programmer this data is useful in making my own judgements on these distros. My conclusions , feel free to challenge them if you so wish, are : 1. Manjaro/Arch is roughly equivalent. There is good balance between I/O optimisation and computational optimisation, perhaps favouring I/O. 2. Garuda is optimising explicitly for speed in computation and data-reliability in I/O, with their zen kernel and BTRFS. This makes it enticing to use Garuda for gaming , rendering or other work where there is a sustained computational bottleneck, while the others are better suited to general purpose use where the vast majority of the time there is an I/O bottleneck. The problem I have is I ,as a dev, understand I/O latency and bottlenecks are a much, much larger problem for so much of what a computer does, that I would personally find the obsession with optimising for computation at the expense of already unimpressive I/O speeds of today as amateurish and misguided. Except for very few select workloads involving sustained high intensity GPU/CPU workloads, this is shortsighted. But of course, people are entitled to their preferences and this might make sense to gamers or rendering rigs which are blinged out with NVMe/PCIe SSDs and a large part of the disk I/O bottleneck is not worth thinking of, at least relative to the SATA SSD/HDD masses. Even their, their RAM I/O was also much worse, and so is their RAM usage, which is shocking.
I'm using garuda kde dragonized after trying so many distros , it made me forget windows which I've used for more than a decade ( I actually deleted the windows partition after using it for few days) From my experience with the elementary , Manjaro , etc. (I've a hdd only device) other distros like elementary , zorin os , lubuntu etc. have faster boot and shut down times on a hdd but garuda is blazing fast once it's on. Thus am ok with the slower boot and shutdown speeds because of the experience it delivers is worth the extra few seconds of wait time. The out of the box experience and support is simply stellar for a newbie who wants to get used to linux and learn. Plus , if you can always disable services you don't need from startup to save some time.
I've been really thinking of making the jump to Linux as a daily driver. Heard nothing but good things about manjaro and garuda. My rig is like 5 years old but still solid, think garuda is the way?
@@Justin-bn9mr One thing I especially love about linux systems is ,it can be configured to run even a potato, so to answer your question even a 10 year old rig would do just fine , get a ssd though , a sata ssd and Linux will breathe new life to your rig.
@@Justin-bn9mr Avoid Manjaro; all of the crap they've pulled in the past 3 or so years has been ridiculous (like the SSL certificates expiring or the broken packages they've used in their repos), I would go with EndeavourOS unless you are absolutely trying to avoid the terminal at all costs.
Startup speed depends on which services and apps are launched at startup. This can easily be changed to make an OS faster. Garuda has zen kernel ,zfs RAM , BRFS / zstd compression and other advanced features such as timeshift access at boot. These features are more important to me than maximum speed.
Very nice and useful comparison, thank you for making this video! Just switched from openSUSE to Manjaro this week... definitely a choice I feel happy with.
@みやぞのさくら i think endeavour os gets very close to arch in this aspect my ubuntu and manjaro installs had around 3000+packages but now i have only 800-900 with Endeavour and that is because i use gnome
I have a powerful PC with a Ryzen 9 and 16gb of ram and an SSD. Garuda boots up in 4 seconds for me. Depends on your hardware. I have no issues with it.
I am Fan of Manjaro.. For any sort.. From OS Installation, Fast Boot, good grub2 which remembers previous loggedin os, Package Manager to quick install any software..
We have plenty of Linux distros, so it's almost a matter of opinion, of choice, of being used to something (features), my first distro is actually Garuda, I've never used any other before, I'm pretty happy with it, actually I don't like to "change things", I started I'll will keep it, SmPlayer is very fast, Foxit opens heavy pdfs very fast (I do not recommend Okular for heavy pdfs, usually scanned pages). I actually think it's very beautiful, I like dark themes.
I am running Manjaro KDE and I have just switched to Wayland - and that has made a difference. I have always given the Wayland session a try but rejected it pretty quickly since something major did not work, but not this time ! It seems smoother and more responsive (hard to measure though). I hear that the next XFCE might also be moving to Wayland, so that might bring some performance gains to everyone
I installed Garuda as a new user and mine only boots in about 15 sec. I see options to make it boot faster if I needed. I installed the Dragonized version. I'm sure your machine is better than mine which makes me wonder why my machine boots so much faster than the numbers you advertised.
I think comparing mainline arch to the rest isn't a valid comparison because it's 100% up to the user to decide what they install, which is the main point of slowdown there. The kernel itself is the same across the machines (ignoring differing versions)
I expected plain Arch to be much faster. Right now I use manjaro and I like it but as far as I remember my days with plain Arch it was starting up way faster (like in few seconds) and also much less ram and cpu usage during normal work.
I've used Manjaro over the last 4 years, solid performance but definitely doesn't hold a new user's hand. Highly recommended for people who like Virtual Machines, Emulation, or development with speed in mind.
Nice vid!, did you use the traditional Manjaro installer or the Minimal that comes with just the right thing? I use the second one because it is much lighter and cleaner and perhaps even with a better performance
This proves that Garuda is not bloated, it's built for performance. All the idiots that obsess over low memory usage or short boot times, don't understand how modern OSes are built or used.
I do care somewhat about low memory usage, but it depends on what the memory is actually used for. 2 GB of RAM for Chrome or Vivaldi is ridiculous, compared to e.g. Falkon and Firefox that use 1 GB max. At least in my experience, and I've used all of those browsers for years (now kind of settled on Falkon). However, Garuda seems to use the memory for things that actually make sense, so then I don't mind a bit of extra RAM usage.
Nice video, glad to see Manjaro doing well. The only question I have with the timings is; Are these 1 off timed events or the average taken from a series of timed events? I only ask because a 1 off timing could be impacted by anything that randomly occured in the background, atleast doing an average take should remove any discrepancies that could occur
I was wondering the same thing. Sometimes just opening a terminal can be a hair slower or faster, depending on the day (even when no other apps are running).
@@LDavis yeah it's a common theme among most of the Linux RUclipsrs. Provide quick and inaccurate data for some easy views, such as timing tree on root and considering that an accurate way to determine a terminals GPU acceleration, or not timing things in a correct manner to account for discrepancies.
All the tests (non side-by-side) are averages based on running multiple times in different orders on different days. This video took me about a week to put together nothing about easy views. As far as I'm aware I'm really the only Linux RUclipsr that puts these types of videos together.
Even the side by side tests took an entire day because I had to leave the camera in one place and install each distribution to run the test on the same machine. In between tests I let the computer cool down for about 30 minutes or so back to base temperature.
@@TechHut that's fair, next time I would suggest outlining that fact in the video, and show how you did things to account for temps, background process discrepancies etc. This way it would actually show some validity to the results
Thanks for making the video! What do you think... if I install i3 through EndeavorOS or through Arch Linux... shouldn't they have the same reboot time?
People have no idea, the amount of hard work you put in. Keep it up! I am a Unix user and admin for 20 years. Used red hat, freebsd and solaris for the most part. So yeah, im immune to all the how great linux is fluff.....
Excellent Video, I really liked it. It's lucky I found this video to help me with what os I should choose. Can you make another video about debian-based distribution, That will be a more informational video
I recently came across the xanmod kernel. Afaik a performance optimized kernel. Could you try Stock arch kernel vs. zen kernel vs. xanmod kernel? I can recall watching a short clip where the xanmod kernel consistently achieved notably higher framerates in games.
I tried all but keep coming to EndeavourOS. It's super stable only problem is, actually for all Linux, that my lenovo ideapad's battery keeps getting hot while charging. That is even hotter than windows 10 and after charging the battery temperature doesn't cool that much as windows.
@@jgsource552 Yes, mostly because of that. What I need can mostly be installed by the installer, not spending extra time on installing software or packages. I had tried 10's of distros before and because of that I had lost motivation to spend little time to manually install something which is also not my real work. I have also heard that Arch linux has a system breaking problem for bad packages and which has to fix manually which is also time consuming (kinda got scared of it while having no motivation to do extra things). EndeavorOs as a Arch distro should have the same problem but I don't know how it doesn't give me problems to fix🥴 even my laptops battery doesn't heat up like other distros and even cooler than windows. So, I stayed with it.
Very damn little...Try MX and get a stopwatch. Boot from norm (non sysd) and reboot(advanced on boot menu) boot with sysd....Nada.. Now as far as what homey is testing doesn't stand a chance against Antix or Mabox....or Bunsen labs
Great job, I'm super curious as to where those kdenlive results come from. They seem to be super significant and I'd be curious if there's a way to investigate more.
Basically use whatever you feel comfortable in. But I would say not being able to smoothly upgrade the kernel is a big downside, they need to fix that.
If y'all have around 8 GB of RAM, then you've got to try out Garuda Linux at least once, it's one of the sexiest Linux distro I've ever seen. And I don't know about the benchmarks, but personally whenever I use Garuda, it hasn't let me down, it's very smooth when it comes to its performance. Try it and thank me later 😉
It makes no sense to compare those distros, they are all speedy, like they are all arch based, a more interesting question would be if Manjaro maybe turns out to be less stable than arch e.g. I have a feeling after using EndeavourOS, ArcoLinux and Manjaro that Manjaro isn't really that that stable......?
i'm not surprised manjaro took a performance hit when the kernel installer tool was used, it doesn't actively install the linux-headers package for the kernel that is being installed, I recently installed 5.15.7-RT and had issues when I rebooted, booted the 5.15.12 kernel and realized that the 5.15.7-RT headers were missing as soon as I installed them my system booted the kernel without any issues.
Tbh, i found your methodology kinda uncharitable towards garuda. I think you shouldve used the zen kernel garuda ships with since they optimse on that. second you shouldve put the ram thing in context, at least hint why garuda does that. and thirdly, i dont know if you repeated the one thing garuda fell hard behind, but I think you shouldve, cause i tested that one and it was dead even with the rest...so theres that. Anyway good video. Edit. Also i actually have garuda booting faster than manjaro, but a tat slower than arch. idk, seems to be a big margin of error here
I installed Garuda on ancient Surface Pro 3, and hot damn does that thing boot fast. Boots like a frickin Chromebook. Must be that modified Zen kernel, eh?
My insight is like all of us , all are good afterall these are popular arch based distro and for most of us these don't affect but if anyone is newbie one would may need community ,in such instances manjaro or Arco surpasses all be it community response or bug fix help.
I think the next test is which is the most user friendly for someone looking to switch from windows, because some who have tried ubuntu and don't like firefox browser or the way the file system is constantly staring at us like we have no idea what all of "that" is beside user file system, I would have to say Garuda makes a huge leap to make it much more windows-esque if you know what I mean.
Now I wonder how these compare to Kernel v 6.6. Default settings aren't all the best for all workloads on all hardware. So, it's possible some of these runs would be better/worse if some settings were changed prior to running them. Even a 7GB/s NVMe drive shows a noticeable difference with BFQ (not default) over what I forget is, when multiple processes demand access simultaneously. CPU gov, always set to 'performance'. At least until you have the patience and time to sort out which fine tuning governor and specific setting wins in power saving without a noticeable drop in performance. Modern CPU schedulers are also something to consider. Surprising that probably the best so far, EEVDF, is based on a paper written in 1990s but doesn't matter to consider since it's default now. IRT priorities, IDK if EEVDF considers priority. If you have plenty of CPU cores, simply set your most important response sensitive app affinity to a specific one/set and deny other processes/threads from using it.
Just tried Garuda today (LiveCD-Test) - holy sht.. that sucker is super responsive. Love it but I got issues with installing Resolve Studio which might be an arch-linux-wide issue :S
I would have prefered more real world usage. Like the KDE render was useful, App startup time is nice. Would love to see some game play or at least game loading time.
Nothing weird about it. You probably have different hardware which impacts boot times a lot. Manufactures have different firmware, some are faster than the others.
I dual boot windows and tried multiple linux distros including debian on my Asus Laptop but brightness change value with no effect and I cannot solve it Ive tried every fix on YT what should I do ? :/ this is the only reason im not switching from windows
Thing with your Geekbench results on Garuda is that it's quite unfair to the distro. It boasts quite heavy composition effects on the desktop but makes a very good job at taming those processes and can leverage on its configuration to get best performance out of fullscreen apps (mainly thought for games). That's what we can witness on the Unigine results, which makes me think that Garuda wouldn't have been that far behind (if at all) in Geekbench if ran in fullscreen or configured to trigger feral game mode.
I use Manjaro. I think it's arch with better hardware detection. I used arch for years. I just redid a mac cool pro and only endeavor worked with the Wi-Fi card. So for all the trash talk. They are all the same. The package manager is what makes Linux unique. And arch based is really just how much of a pain do you want your install to be?. I run manjaro entirely built on xfs file systems. Sitting on 128GB ram. Dual processor 16 cores with 32 virtual cores. Streaming plex to like 10 people with only about 3% utilization while doing everything else you can think of. So I don't see any difference.
Have you read Garuda's statement on memory usage? They say they try to use as much as possible, as it costs nothing to give up RAM but speeds everything up until it's needed elsewhere. So the fact that Garuda has both the highest memory usage, as well as some of the best app response and performance scores, is not contradictory, it's what you should expect.
😂 But when Microsoft give the same statement it's a lie...
@@thelittlecousin5211 Thats because windows uses twice as much ram yet is slow AF. Plus it uses a lot more cpu.
that's the same statement arch Linux in general makes though, and it's not about actually using the RAM, but reserving it. There's no reason for a kernel to not reserve memory for itself except for usage statistics and virtual machines. (because it needs to be reserved to be used by either the kernel or a userspace program)
Arch Linux (the kernel) as I understand it reserves slightly more than it needs whenever the currently reserved memory is filled, so htop can still show a vaguely correct usage statistic.
Depends. It's difficult to decide if memory is being used well.
Garuda is also the only distro that ships with a significantly different custom kernel (zen), which explains why it was the outlier in several of the tests.
Damnn it is almost as it was Arch vs Arch vs Arch vs Arch :O I know it isn't entirely true, but yeah :D
Yeah basically 😅
😂😂👊
Josh vs Josh vs Josh vs Josh
So according to you, ubuntu vs mint vs pop vs elementary would be Ubuntu vs Ubuntu vs Ubuntu vs Ubuntu ?
@@rishirajsaikia1323 no it will be debian vs debian vs debian vs debian
All distros here perform virtually the same so this is my recommendation for new users:
Arch: If you want minimal and total control of your linux. The installation is not that hard but it takes some times to do.
Manjaro: If you want easy installation and don't want to deal with Arch's "quirks." It has its own package repository that promises stability.
Garuda: If you want easy installation and use the Arch repository directly. Also if you want a cool looking desktop OOTB.
Endeavour: Same as Garuda but without the performance tweaks which are mostly negligible.
Which is also true for most linux distros out there. You just end up choosing one because of your software needs (one distro has something that the rest dont have, or gets update more frequently) or admin needs (package management is easier, or you are just more used to it).
I moved from Slackware to RedHat to Mandrake to Debian, and now I use Debian, as it covers all my needs. If software is not available for it, docker is now a solution that allows you to install it without having to make your own debian package.
"is not that hard but it takes some time to do" is a more accurate representation of Arch
For regular users Manjaro is perfect. You won’t be missing out on anything.
@みやぞのさくら Exactly lmao
@@eckee I agree. When you get more confident with arch based distros you can always switch later. As for me I have, Garuda's Chaotic AUR rupo enabled on my Manjaro install and I run a modified Kernal from that repo (linux-tkg-muqss) and their modified wine-staging build which together adds some extra frames for gaming on my machine (10% faster with some games). Their Manjaro Architect installer is amazing (best intaller I've used) and allows BTRFS with Timeshift pretty easily. So you can go to Manjaro's testing repos pretty safely and just go back to an earlier snapshot if anything breaks (which it hasn't for the most part).
You should do one of Gentoo vs Arch, to see if compiling the programs yourself makes a difference
That's a good idea!
That would be interesting!!!
@gghhkm but you compile most of the programs
@gghhkm oh, I read it wrong lol. You are right
gentooLTO might show a slight performance increase but that's not really the point of Gentoo, it's to customize your binaries to match whatever your use-case is.
If you liked this consider checking out my other benchmarking videos! ruclips.net/p/PLFxfbw6hcvOc6y48K6K-1-Tv8chR-MPIU
Fantastic work. Thank you for making such a detailed comparison. I have expected more discrepancies between these distributions, and it was really interesting to see how close they are most of the time, and then - they weren't!
Loved Manjaro but now I'm a big fan of Endeavour OS because it's basicaly a real Arch Linux with good tools to install and setup. The performance is awesome.
Since there is almost no difference in performance what are the benefits of "real arch" over Manjaro?
@@TomFoolery9001 Based purely on my experience (Manjaro 2014-2020, Arch 2021-2022) Arch is breaking significantly less, plus has more straight forward approach to kernel updates where you just picking between kernel, kernel-lts and kernel-zen, while in Manjaro there is a whole tool to install different kernels, which is a bit of mess. In addition to that Manjaro team can postpone updates for 2-3 months especially during DE update cycles like new Plasma release or new Gnome release. And another good thing is that AUR packages usually correlate to the Arch packages versioning, and can break on Manjaro due to delay in updates delivery.
you really hardwork alot bro.... Deserves more support 💖💖💖
I really respect all of these distros but for daily driver and ease to use I prefer the manjaro, is the most polished Linux distro based on arch, even if there are small gap in speed between the distro, at least on my high specs machine is not noticeable.
Again thank you for your great videos and your efforts to presents to us the best Linux videos in best quality and content.
I'm following you from middle east 👍
I would argue that Garuda is just as polished, but for a different audience. I run Manjaro on my work PC, and Garuda on a gaming PC. Both are easy to install and use, and are very good at meeting the needs of their target audience without the need to tweak the OS.
I use Endeavour and it's great!
Just set up vanilla arch and do it yourself!
but fr though I love knowing everything my pc is doing cuz i made it do it, but it isn't for everyone
@@zainhammad I need my system to work quickly , not to stroke my own ego.
@@codyleeeod garuda's kinda bloated
I knew Garuda wouldn't be the best for a speed test, especially running Dra60nized, beauty isn't free, I was more shocked a few operations Garuda was in the top 2.
They were comparing the XFCE variants though
*dr460nized
But no, GUI elements do not usually impact I/O performance (unless they effectively crash the system), and in those Garuda was at the very bottom.
But it was all xfce.
This was because of Zen kernel..
I don't know about the benchmarks, but personally I've felt like when it comes to actual performance, Garuda is very smooth. And, it's one of the most sexiest Linux distro, so who cares 🤷♂😂
librewish and dragonfire are main heros behind Garuda. Also Naman, TNE, SGS, petsam, tbg and many more team members done great work on Garuda. Salute to whole team.
I have given up on Garuda. I am not complaining but I am indeed sad about it. I want to use Garuda and recommend non-tech users to adopt it as well. I am a Linux user since 12 years. Used so many distros and none broke as often and as much as Garuda. Its updates break the system every 2-3 weeks. I have never had this much trouble over the decade of using Mint, Pop, Ubuntu, Zorin, Elementary. And all of this on an install that was not tweaked at all, all default settings and minimum installed apps!! IDK why Garuda is so prone to breaking. Seems worse than a pre-alpha, almost like a just-compiled first try kinda level of broken-ness!
Linux is supposed to be robust and it indeed is. If Garuda is someone's first experience of Linux I don't they think they will ever try again. You do something wrong and it breaks then you can revert what you did, but if the OS update itself breaks the system, doesn't it make you question well why didn't the devs test it? Seriously nothing much installed other than GIMP, Firefox and Asian Fonts. How can such a default install break so often?
@@Swanicorn most distros don't offer bleeding edge updates and have much larger teams working on testing, no matter what distro u use bleeding edge is always risky and garuda does the best at it revert and wait for few days till new releases come and issues get fixed
@Kushen De SilvaI never said I am comparing Arch based. The question is about stability and usability. I am currently using Manjaro and that is also so much more stable than Garuda. Been 2 weeks and no issues so far. I am comparing Operating system stability as a parameter.
Here's the most stupidest thing Garuda does that isn't breaking the system but annoying: You install Garuda fresh. And there it is the most beautiful and most snappy distro ever.. You want to forever use it. Then you are on Firefox and you watch some RUclips, do some study. Use the system for 6 hours, no other customisation, just use it like a normal person. You restart the system next day and that pretty little panel up top that says Garuda Linux and has a small green 🐉? Well it gets replaced by a square as in unrecognised font. How dumb is that? Right on the main screen. It is like the shiny gold coating was so thin it wore off in one use.
A bunch of small things like that even before the system stops booting to desktop is enough reason to quit it, cuz it makes you question the quality.
@Faiz Ahmed A few months (3-4 ish) ago they made some changes and now it is indeed decent. I do not have any complaints with it now other than maybe the sweet candy beautyline theme getting a bit stale. Other than that the forum has grown a lot, good answers, they pin some helpful articles. Their guide on how to fix the recent gpg key errors was well written, easy to follow and understand. Back when I was sad about it, Garuda was indeed pretty broken.
If you can find it on their forum, find a question about pamac not showing thumbnail icons. Look at how hostile that conversation got between the mods and whoever asked that question. It was an easy fix but they just kept denying the issue.
@Black Future I still think it is Garuda's fault. What you are saying is true but in case of Garuda it is more their fault than Arch. Why? Well if you have used both Arch and Garuda you'd know how highly customised Garuda is, causing things to break.
Also how is it wrong of me to expect a stable experience? If I want cutting edge Arch I will use actual Arch. If I am using an Arch based distro, how is it wrong of me to expect the Devs do some testing? Why else should they call it their distro? How is that incorrect to expect? It is fairly easy to do as well you know? For example in Pacman config file, if you place custom repos above arch repos, the update gets pulled from custom repo instead of the arch one if it breaks. Some distros have even done this and even though some packages exist in AUR, they get maintained by the distro's custom repo.
A perfect example of this is Arcolinux, arch based, but the developer is so on top of breakage that a fix/address is issued almost same day.
Довольно любопытные тесты. К тому же я начал учить английский по таким видео. :)
I must say that my experience on a 2014 thinkpad with an SSD and 8 gigs of RAM was that Garuda was noticeably more stable and snappier than Manjaro. Possibly Manjaro might work better on a lower-specced machine though.
Excellent video. I really liked. Can you do the same with debian-based distributions? Elementary, Mint, Ubuntu and, of course, Debian! That will be an interesting video as well.
Edit: After the tests you could make a comparison between Arch-based and Debian-based results
Debian buster vs Debian Bullseye (testing) vs Ubuntu 20.04 LTS vs Ubuntu 21.04 will be interesting
if anyone should be going up against debian it should be slackware!
battle of the grandparents.
my money is on slackware.
@@miou-miou-
Fedora vs Debian vs Arch vs Slackware vs Gentoo vs Suse
then we settle it once and for all
For how highly touted EndeavourOS is, real world usage like booting and USB transfer looking much better on my preferred OS Manjaro! Thank you for the comparison
very, very good content! please keep up these distro comparisons i love them
Thanks for this video. As a programmer this data is useful in making my own judgements on these distros.
My conclusions , feel free to challenge them if you so wish, are :
1. Manjaro/Arch is roughly equivalent. There is good balance between I/O optimisation and computational optimisation, perhaps favouring I/O.
2. Garuda is optimising explicitly for speed in computation and data-reliability in I/O, with their zen kernel and BTRFS.
This makes it enticing to use Garuda for gaming , rendering or other work where there is a sustained computational bottleneck, while the others are better suited to general purpose use where the vast majority of the time there is an I/O bottleneck.
The problem I have is I ,as a dev, understand I/O latency and bottlenecks are a much, much larger problem for so much of what a computer does, that I would personally find the obsession with optimising for computation at the expense of already unimpressive I/O speeds of today as amateurish and misguided. Except for very few select workloads involving sustained high intensity GPU/CPU workloads, this is shortsighted. But of course, people are entitled to their preferences and this might make sense to gamers or rendering rigs which are blinged out with NVMe/PCIe SSDs and a large part of the disk I/O bottleneck is not worth thinking of, at least relative to the SATA SSD/HDD masses. Even their, their RAM I/O was also much worse, and so is their RAM usage, which is shocking.
i5 11th + 16 Gig + integrated GPU
To be used for Java programming.
Which Distro could give best performance overall?
@@HemangxVyas gentoo lmao
I'm using garuda kde dragonized after trying so many distros , it made me forget windows which I've used for more than a decade ( I actually deleted the windows partition after using it for few days)
From my experience with the elementary , Manjaro , etc. (I've a hdd only device) other distros like elementary , zorin os , lubuntu etc. have faster boot and shut down times on a hdd but garuda is blazing fast once it's on. Thus am ok with the slower boot and shutdown speeds because of the experience it delivers is worth the extra few seconds of wait time.
The out of the box experience and support is simply stellar for a newbie who wants to get used to linux and learn.
Plus , if you can always disable services you don't need from startup to save some time.
I've been really thinking of making the jump to Linux as a daily driver. Heard nothing but good things about manjaro and garuda. My rig is like 5 years old but still solid, think garuda is the way?
@@Justin-bn9mr One thing I especially love about linux systems is ,it can be configured to run even a potato, so to answer your question even a 10 year old rig would do just fine , get a ssd though , a sata ssd and Linux will breathe new life to your rig.
@@papiyabasu1564 sounds good, ty for the words of encouragement!
@@Justin-bn9mr Avoid Manjaro; all of the crap they've pulled in the past 3 or so years has been ridiculous (like the SSL certificates expiring or the broken packages they've used in their repos), I would go with EndeavourOS unless you are absolutely trying to avoid the terminal at all costs.
Startup speed depends on which services and apps are launched at startup. This can easily be changed to make an OS faster. Garuda has zen kernel ,zfs RAM , BRFS / zstd compression and other advanced features such as timeshift access at boot. These features are more important to me than maximum speed.
Very nice and useful comparison, thank you for making this video! Just switched from openSUSE to Manjaro this week... definitely a choice I feel happy with.
Awesome video! I love your videos, they are so well done!
next: use arch with the performance cpu governor + zen kernel and compare it with garuda
@みやぞのさくら this is true
@みやぞのさくら i think endeavour os gets very close to arch in this aspect my ubuntu and manjaro installs had around 3000+packages but now i have only 800-900 with Endeavour and that is because i use gnome
@みやぞのさくら I noticed no difference between my Garuda install over my former install of Arch. I like Garuda because it comes stock the btrfs file system.
You'd get much more performance with Arch considering that if you don't install anymore packages you literally just have a tty.
@みやぞのさくら how would you replace systemd with openrc on arch
Hell yeah!! This was a good one! Thanks for all the hard work mate!
Great video. Would've liked to have seen Parabola Linux added to the mix, just to see how a Linux-libre version would've compared.
Very intersting results I still prefer vanilla Arch because I don't need that many packages and I surprisingly had less issues than Manjaro and Garuda
Garuda Linux is ❤
The feel of being a gamer and a programmer😌
I'm loving it.
Really? Is it?
Thanks a lot for this video. I am about to install Garuda gaming edition just now.
Great video! I've been rocking with Endeavor for a while now, and I am loving it.
I have a powerful PC with a Ryzen 9 and 16gb of ram and an SSD. Garuda boots up in 4 seconds for me. Depends on your hardware. I have no issues with it.
Garuda has been treating me so well, I've been so impressed with not just performance but stability and ease of use. Currently my favorite
Thanks you and greetings from Thailand, I'm new to endeavour OS 😄
I am Fan of Manjaro.. For any sort.. From OS Installation, Fast Boot, good grub2 which remembers previous loggedin os, Package Manager to quick install any software..
Fantastic Manjaro 👍
When this video released garuda linux did ship with 5.11.11 zen kernel on the kde dragonized gaming and the gnome version as well.
We have plenty of Linux distros, so it's almost a matter of opinion, of choice, of being used to something (features), my first distro is actually Garuda, I've never used any other before, I'm pretty happy with it, actually I don't like to "change things", I started I'll will keep it, SmPlayer is very fast, Foxit opens heavy pdfs very fast (I do not recommend Okular for heavy pdfs, usually scanned pages). I actually think it's very beautiful, I like dark themes.
I have to hand it to you, there are so many bad channels out there. It is really nice to find one that is consistently informative.
I am running Manjaro KDE and I have just switched to Wayland - and that has made a difference. I have always given the Wayland session a try but rejected it pretty quickly since something major did not work, but not this time ! It seems smoother and more responsive (hard to measure though). I hear that the next XFCE might also be moving to Wayland, so that might bring some performance gains to everyone
Do you play some games? The problems I encountered in my experience with wayland were almost all gaming related.
at the end of the day, every linux distro is the boss over each other.
I installed Garuda as a new user and mine only boots in about 15 sec. I see options to make it boot faster if I needed. I installed the Dragonized version. I'm sure your machine is better than mine which makes me wonder why my machine boots so much faster than the numbers you advertised.
I think comparing mainline arch to the rest isn't a valid comparison because it's 100% up to the user to decide what they install, which is the main point of slowdown there. The kernel itself is the same across the machines (ignoring differing versions)
Could you do a new video update with Kernel 6.0 and the newest version of the distros now? :)
Interesting video. I initially commented on you not including Antergos, but I've since learned that Antergos is not being developed anymore.
I expected plain Arch to be much faster. Right now I use manjaro and I like it but as far as I remember my days with plain Arch it was starting up way faster (like in few seconds) and also much less ram and cpu usage during normal work.
I was very much surprised too, I thought it should take about 15 seconds max, but 25?
Vanilla Arch in my opinion is No. 1. by far.
Or Artix.
Did Garud's extra ram consumption actually benefit it much? Didn't have a clear advantage??
I've used Manjaro over the last 4 years, solid performance but definitely doesn't hold a new user's hand. Highly recommended for people who like Virtual Machines, Emulation, or development with speed in mind.
Nice vid!, did you use the traditional Manjaro installer or the Minimal that comes with just the right thing? I use the second one because it is much lighter and cleaner and perhaps even with a better performance
This proves that Garuda is not bloated, it's built for performance.
All the idiots that obsess over low memory usage or short boot times, don't understand how modern OSes are built or used.
I do care somewhat about low memory usage, but it depends on what the memory is actually used for. 2 GB of RAM for Chrome or Vivaldi is ridiculous, compared to e.g. Falkon and Firefox that use 1 GB max. At least in my experience, and I've used all of those browsers for years (now kind of settled on Falkon).
However, Garuda seems to use the memory for things that actually make sense, so then I don't mind a bit of extra RAM usage.
Running on M.2 my Manjaro install boots in 8 seconds. If I removed the boot menu from the start up process it would boot in around 5-6 seconds.
Nice video, glad to see Manjaro doing well. The only question I have with the timings is; Are these 1 off timed events or the average taken from a series of timed events?
I only ask because a 1 off timing could be impacted by anything that randomly occured in the background, atleast doing an average take should remove any discrepancies that could occur
I was wondering the same thing. Sometimes just opening a terminal can be a hair slower or faster, depending on the day (even when no other apps are running).
@@LDavis yeah it's a common theme among most of the Linux RUclipsrs. Provide quick and inaccurate data for some easy views, such as timing tree on root and considering that an accurate way to determine a terminals GPU acceleration, or not timing things in a correct manner to account for discrepancies.
All the tests (non side-by-side) are averages based on running multiple times in different orders on different days. This video took me about a week to put together nothing about easy views. As far as I'm aware I'm really the only Linux RUclipsr that puts these types of videos together.
Even the side by side tests took an entire day because I had to leave the camera in one place and install each distribution to run the test on the same machine. In between tests I let the computer cool down for about 30 minutes or so back to base temperature.
@@TechHut that's fair, next time I would suggest outlining that fact in the video, and show how you did things to account for temps, background process discrepancies etc. This way it would actually show some validity to the results
Well. This made me glad I went to Garuda. Been using it for a while and love it.
Garuda uses a lot of ram because of caching. And it's also slower to start and shutdown precisely because of that.
Would love to see their performance/benchmark on LTS kernels.
No difference on my side. i have 2 exact same setups 1 on LTS.
The LTS one acts a bit more stable.
@@DCM777. ohhhhh
Thanks for making the video! What do you think... if I install i3 through EndeavorOS or through Arch Linux... shouldn't they have the same reboot time?
1:51 Sponsoring thing, I think the same words I heard somewhere
DT
People have no idea, the amount of hard work you put in.
Keep it up!
I am a Unix user and admin for 20 years. Used red hat, freebsd and solaris for the most part. So yeah, im immune to all the how great linux is fluff.....
based BSD user 🗿
Excellent Video, I really liked it. It's lucky I found this video to help me with what os I should choose. Can you make another video about debian-based distribution, That will be a more informational video
I recently came across the xanmod kernel. Afaik a performance optimized kernel. Could you try Stock arch kernel vs. zen kernel vs. xanmod kernel?
I can recall watching a short clip where the xanmod kernel consistently achieved notably higher framerates in games.
I don't wanna use a Kernel altered by who knows who! Just stick with the Arch Kernels.
I tried all but keep coming to EndeavourOS. It's super stable only problem is, actually for all Linux, that my lenovo ideapad's battery keeps getting hot while charging. That is even hotter than windows 10 and after charging the battery temperature doesn't cool that much as windows.
Why use endeavor over pure arch aside from ease of installation?
@@jgsource552 Yes, mostly because of that. What I need can mostly be installed by the installer, not spending extra time on installing software or packages.
I had tried 10's of distros before and because of that I had lost motivation to spend little time to manually install something which is also not my real work.
I have also heard that Arch linux has a system breaking problem for bad packages and which has to fix manually which is also time consuming (kinda got scared of it while having no motivation to do extra things). EndeavorOs as a Arch distro should have the same problem but I don't know how it doesn't give me problems to fix🥴 even my laptops battery doesn't heat up like other distros and even cooler than windows. So, I stayed with it.
Finally, the match of the champions.
Will you ever test FreeBSD vs Linux?
So yeah, imma just continue on manjaro
You should do a Debian vs. Devuan one to see what a difference System D makes.
Very damn little...Try MX and get a stopwatch. Boot from norm (non sysd) and reboot(advanced on boot menu) boot with sysd....Nada..
Now as far as what homey is testing doesn't stand a chance against Antix or Mabox....or Bunsen labs
Arch vs Artix
Only runit is at all faster then systemd and that’s really only on older hardware
He could also do Arch vs Artix with the choice of systems runit openrc S6 and i know the answer :-)
@@garth56 And the answer will be?
Great job, I'm super curious as to where those kdenlive results come from. They seem to be super significant and I'd be curious if there's a way to investigate more.
There is a Manjaro minimal edition also. It has like 850 packages installed by default
pointless
@@orkhepaj Why is it pointless?
@@freddymercury2259 because you will have to install a lot of packages anyway
Basically use whatever you feel comfortable in. But I would say not being able to smoothly upgrade the kernel is a big downside, they need to fix that.
Thanks for great videos! Can you make a video comparing these distors in other terms like overal comparispn between them?
If y'all have around 8 GB of RAM, then you've got to try out Garuda Linux at least once, it's one of the sexiest Linux distro I've ever seen. And I don't know about the benchmarks, but personally whenever I use Garuda, it hasn't let me down, it's very smooth when it comes to its performance. Try it and thank me later 😉
No. Your definition of sexy is subjective. That neon is bound to give my PC cancer.
It makes no sense to compare those distros, they are all speedy, like they are all arch based, a more interesting question would be if Manjaro maybe turns out to be less stable than arch e.g. I have a feeling after using EndeavourOS, ArcoLinux and Manjaro that Manjaro isn't really that that stable......?
I am in Endeavour and Garuda... Both good
i'm not surprised manjaro took a performance hit when the kernel installer tool was used, it doesn't actively install the linux-headers package for the kernel that is being installed, I recently installed 5.15.7-RT and had issues when I rebooted, booted the 5.15.12 kernel and realized that the 5.15.7-RT headers were missing as soon as I installed them my system booted the kernel without any issues.
Is there anywhere to download that terminal color profile you used for Endeavor OS? I really liked it
it's the default palette in endeavor os
Tbh, i found your methodology kinda uncharitable towards garuda. I think you shouldve used the zen kernel garuda ships with since they optimse on that. second you shouldve put the ram thing in context, at least hint why garuda does that. and thirdly, i dont know if you repeated the one thing garuda fell hard behind, but I think you shouldve, cause i tested that one and it was dead even with the rest...so theres that. Anyway good video.
Edit. Also i actually have garuda booting faster than manjaro, but a tat slower than arch. idk, seems to be a big margin of error here
I installed Garuda on ancient Surface Pro 3, and hot damn does that thing boot fast. Boots like a frickin Chromebook. Must be that modified Zen kernel, eh?
My insight is like all of us , all are good afterall these are popular arch based distro and for most of us these don't affect but if anyone is newbie one would may need community ,in such instances manjaro or Arco surpasses all be it community response or bug fix help.
I've actually had good experience using garuda linux'es forum
It would be really cool to have BigLinux in this test too, it's a remaster of Manjaro with several changes.
Congrats on getting YT memberships!
I think the next test is which is the most user friendly for someone looking to switch from windows, because some who have tried ubuntu and don't like firefox browser or the way the file system is constantly staring at us like we have no idea what all of "that" is beside user file system, I would have to say Garuda makes a huge leap to make it much more windows-esque if you know what I mean.
So basically it really doesn't matter too much, what you run out of these.
Fun.
Now I wonder how these compare to Kernel v 6.6. Default settings aren't all the best for all workloads on all hardware. So, it's possible some of these runs would be better/worse if some settings were changed prior to running them. Even a 7GB/s NVMe drive shows a noticeable difference with BFQ (not default) over what I forget is, when multiple processes demand access simultaneously. CPU gov, always set to 'performance'. At least until you have the patience and time to sort out which fine tuning governor and specific setting wins in power saving without a noticeable drop in performance. Modern CPU schedulers are also something to consider. Surprising that probably the best so far, EEVDF, is based on a paper written in 1990s but doesn't matter to consider since it's default now. IRT priorities, IDK if EEVDF considers priority. If you have plenty of CPU cores, simply set your most important response sensitive app affinity to a specific one/set and deny other processes/threads from using it.
Just tried Garuda today (LiveCD-Test) - holy sht.. that sucker is super responsive. Love it but I got issues with installing Resolve Studio which might be an arch-linux-wide issue :S
I would have prefered more real world usage. Like the KDE render was useful, App startup time is nice. Would love to see some game play or at least game loading time.
nice work bro,,,,what about power/battery consumption on Garuda linux, mine drains the battery fast than normal
@みやぞのさくら what DE do you use with arch ?
Weird, for me endeavor os boots in
Nothing weird about it. You probably have different hardware which impacts boot times a lot. Manufactures have different firmware, some are faster than the others.
Try Q4OS blazing fast!
Thanks a lot for the video!
I dual boot windows and tried multiple linux distros including debian on my Asus Laptop but brightness change value with no effect and I cannot solve it Ive tried every fix on YT what should I do ? :/ this is the only reason im not switching from windows
Thing with your Geekbench results on Garuda is that it's quite unfair to the distro. It boasts quite heavy composition effects on the desktop but makes a very good job at taming those processes and can leverage on its configuration to get best performance out of fullscreen apps (mainly thought for games). That's what we can witness on the Unigine results, which makes me think that Garuda wouldn't have been that far behind (if at all) in Geekbench if ran in fullscreen or configured to trigger feral game mode.
If you are using Arch based OS then cheers you are already gone far 🤩🤩🤩
Really surprised with Garuda. I have been looking at giving it a shot.
I love benchmarking videos.
I use Manjaro. I think it's arch with better hardware detection. I used arch for years. I just redid a mac cool pro and only endeavor worked with the Wi-Fi card. So for all the trash talk. They are all the same. The package manager is what makes Linux unique. And arch based is really just how much of a pain do you want your install to be?. I run manjaro entirely built on xfs file systems. Sitting on 128GB ram. Dual processor 16 cores with 32 virtual cores. Streaming plex to like 10 people with only about 3% utilization while doing everything else you can think of. So I don't see any difference.
Anyone has any thoughts on Arch Craft?
A minimal arch distro that looks quite nice out of the box.
XFCE vs XFCE vs XFCE vs XFCE, I can't wait to find out which one wins.
The point is testing different Arch distros not the desktop environment lmao
Artix also based on Arch but doesn't use systemd, I'd like to see how Artix performs in future videos, thank you
Please compare battery life on laptops for different linux distros
Interesting test. Thanks :)
Do they all use same kernel modules and same filesystem type? Did you run just one test or series of tests with avereging results?
Which desktop environment did you use here
Garuda is meant for gaming, so their timing hurts other things. That is why I tell people to use a stock kernel...
where can i learn garuda linux? anyone tell me
Just look up "Garuda review/tutorial" ... There are plenty of videos on youtube with details
@@ujjvalw2684 Thank you❤