Bob Palowoda wrote:
> Ok this is in respect of SXCE 101a which includes both Songbird and Rhythmbox.
> I have what I suspect as a mediocre size library of mp3 that is 113G in size. 
>  But that
> is not the issue.  When I examine the RSS value of Songbird (506M) vs the RSS 
> value of Rhythmbox 87M for the same size of imported mp3 files that is quite 
> a large
> difference.  
>
>  The question is what is a reasonable consumption of memory for a multimedia 
> application?  I do understand that Songbird has other options but what I 
> would 
> like a good understanding is what is a reasonable limit of memory consumption
> of these two multimedia applications on a desktop with 4G of memory. 
>
>  I would just like to hear some logical justification of the memory 
> consumption with
> the intended target audience/usage of their respective systems.
>
> ---Bob
>   
I'd put my money on Rhythmbox over Songbird (I can't stand how 
incompetant the Mozilla developers are) mainly because it's more native 
(In a sense of sharing resources/memory) to GNOME.  It all depends on 
how the songs are parsed and tracked, but I can bet you Songbird uses 
more CPU at the least, and probably more ram, especially for such a 
relatively large collection.

That is hardly mediocre/modest by normal definition, and if you've ran 
Firefox with a bunch of tabs, you'd know how dog slow it becomes.  
Rhythmbox is less complex (Lacks a few features that are catering to 
iTunes people, though I am one of those and prefer it due to simplicity).

Try for yourself, but I would say a media application should not use 
more than about 256mb of memory unless it's also a movie player which 
plays HD content (H.264 or MPEG4 with AAC and DTS 5.1 would probably 
bloat the consumption to an upwards of 512mb at least).

James

Reply via email to