Question Kubuntu vs Ubuntu perfomance value

Please provide comments and solutions that are helpful to the author of this topic.

Nunzio_77

Level 5
Thread author
Well-known
Dec 3, 2023
229
641
366
@Bot I have an Asus F3Sr laptop with an Intel Core Duo 2 processor, 4GB of RAM, a 512GB SSD, and an ATI React HD 2400 graphics card.
I'm using Kubuntu 25.10 and am really enjoying the laptop's performance; it's quite fast and responsive.
Since I'm starting to like the GNOME desktop environment customized for Ubuntu, I'd like to install Ubuntu.
Is the performance of the KDE Plasma desktop environment the same as that of GNOME in terms of RAM, CPU usage, etc.?
So, will performance be the same between Kubuntu 25.10 and Ubuntu?
Also, from a performance perspective, which version of Ubuntu should I install: the LTS version or the 25.10 version?
 
@Bot I have an Asus F3Sr laptop with an Intel Core Duo 2 processor, 4GB of RAM, a 512GB SSD, and an ATI React HD 2400 graphics card.
I'm using Kubuntu 25.10 and am really enjoying the laptop's performance; it's quite fast and responsive.
Since I'm starting to like the GNOME desktop environment customized for Ubuntu, I'd like to install Ubuntu.
Is the performance of the KDE Plasma desktop environment the same as that of GNOME in terms of RAM, CPU usage, etc.?
So, will performance be the same between Kubuntu 25.10 and Ubuntu?
Also, from a performance perspective, which version of Ubuntu should I install: the LTS version or the 25.10 version?
On that hardware, KDE Plasma (Kubuntu) will usually be a bit lighter than GNOME (Ubuntu), so you should not expect performance to be exactly the same. Ubuntu with GNOME is likely to use more RAM and a bit more CPU on your Core 2 Duo with 4 GB RAM.

Because my knowledge stops in 2024, I don’t know the exact state of “25.10”, so I’ll answer in general terms (Kubuntu vs Ubuntu, LTS vs interim).

1. KDE Plasma vs GNOME: resource usage

  • RAM usage
    • Modern KDE Plasma is quite optimized and typically idles with noticeably less RAM than GNOME, especially on a lean install.
    • GNOME tends to use more RAM at idle and when multiple extensions/shell integrations are active.
    • With only 4 GB RAM, that extra few hundred MB can make a difference when you open browsers, office apps, etc.
  • CPU usage
    • On normal desktop use (web, office, file manager), both can be smooth, but GNOME’s animations and compositing can be a bit heavier.
    • KDE lets you easily reduce or disable effects, which can help older CPUs and GPUs.
  • GPU / Compositor
    • You have a very old ATI/AMD Radeon HD 2400. GNOME Shell relies heavily on hardware acceleration; if drivers are not ideal, GNOME can feel laggy or push CPU more.
    • KDE also uses compositing but is often a bit more tolerant and configurable (you can switch rendering backends, disable some effects, etc.).
    • On such old hardware you may find Xorg session more reliable than Wayland in either desktop.

Overall, on your laptop:
  • Kubuntu / KDE Plasma will usually feel lighter and more responsive than Ubuntu GNOME.
  • Ubuntu GNOME will probably be usable, but with less free RAM and possibly more stutter if the GPU drivers are not great.

2. Kubuntu 25.10 vs Ubuntu 25.10 on your laptop

Assuming both are from the same Ubuntu base (same kernel, same Mesa, same packages), the main difference is the desktop environment:

  • Kubuntu
    • More configurable; you can trim effects, widgets, background services.
    • Typically lighter on RAM and sometimes a bit lighter on CPU.
    • Can be tuned to work better on very old hardware (turn off blur, transparency, animations).
  • Ubuntu with GNOME
    • Simpler, more opinionated interface.
    • Generally heavier on RAM and GPU.
    • If GNOME’s compositor doesn’t like your Radeon HD 2400, you may see tearing or stutter.

So no, you should not expect identical performance. On that Core 2 Duo / 4 GB machine:
  • Kubuntu will almost certainly perform a bit better.
  • Ubuntu GNOME may still be fine, but you will be closer to the limits of 4 GB.

If you really like the GNOME feel, you could:
  • Install Ubuntu, then test both GNOME on Xorg and the default (usually Wayland) and see which is smoother.
  • Or stay on Kubuntu and tweak Plasma to look and behave more like GNOME (single panel, app grid, etc.).

3. LTS vs 25.10 (interim) for performance

Comparing LTS (e.g. 24.04 LTS) vs a future 25.10-style interim release:

  • Performance
    • There is usually no big raw performance gain in interim releases.
    • Interim versions often ship newer kernels, Mesa, and GNOME/Plasma; that can help for new hardware, but on very old hardware it can also mean:
      • Slightly higher baseline resource usage.
      • Occasionally dropped or more fragile support for very old GPUs.
  • Stability / support
    • LTS is supported longer and tends to get more conservative updates – good for an old laptop you just want to “set and forget”.
    • Interim releases are supported for a much shorter time and change more often; you’ll need to upgrade more frequently.

On a laptop as old as yours, with a legacy ATI GPU, my general recommendation would be:
  • Prefer the current Ubuntu LTS (e.g. Kubuntu/Ubuntu 24.04 LTS) for:
    • Stability
    • Predictable behavior with old hardware
    • Slightly lower risk of driver regressions
  • Only go for 25.10 (or any interim) if:
    • You specifically need a newer kernel/Mesa or
    • You’ve tested it from live USB and confirmed it runs noticeably smoother on your hardware.

4. Practical steps I’d suggest

  • Download Ubuntu 24.04 LTS and Kubuntu 24.04 LTS ISOs.
  • Boot both as Live USB (without installing) and:
    • Open a browser, file manager, maybe a video.
    • Run System Monitor or htop and compare:
      • Idle RAM usage
      • CPU spikes when moving windows / opening apps
  • Check if GNOME on that machine feels smooth enough. If it’s noticeably laggier than Plasma, you have your answer.

Summary
On your Core 2 Duo / 4 GB RAM laptop, KDE Plasma (Kubuntu) will almost always be lighter and more responsive than GNOME (Ubuntu), so performance won’t be the same. For long-term use and overall reliability on such old hardware, I’d recommend sticking with an LTS release (e.g. 24.04 LTS) unless you test 25.10 live and see a clear benefit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nunzio_77
Security wise, Ubuntu 25 should have the Security app which asks you each time when Firefox needs to touch your home directory. So it safeguards your docs and spreadsheets. This feature is not part of 24.

However, my red team has found an exploit for the Update app. Not sure if it works for 25, but it works on 24.
 
Last edited:
@Bot I have an Asus F3Sr laptop with an Intel Core Duo 2 processor, 4GB of RAM, a 512GB SSD, and an ATI React HD 2400 graphics card.
I'm using Kubuntu 25.10 and am really enjoying the laptop's performance; it's quite fast and responsive.
Since I'm starting to like the GNOME desktop environment customized for Ubuntu, I'd like to install Ubuntu.
Is the performance of the KDE Plasma desktop environment the same as that of GNOME in terms of RAM, CPU usage, etc.?
So, will performance be the same between Kubuntu 25.10 and Ubuntu?
Also, from a performance perspective, which version of Ubuntu should I install: the LTS version or the 25.10 version?

As Bot also suggested, Xubuntu would be your ideal distro in terms of performance, out of the two you mentioned.
But of course, personal preferences also come into play...
 
As Bot also suggested, Xubuntu would be your ideal distro in terms of performance, out of the two you mentioned.
But of course, personal preferences also come into play...
On Xubuntu vs Kubuntu/Ubuntu for your hardware

For a Core 2 Duo, 4 GB RAM and an old Radeon HD 2400, Xubuntu (XFCE) is indeed usually the lightest of the three:

  • Xubuntu (XFCE)
    • Lowest RAM usage at idle in most cases.
    • Very light on CPU and GPU effects.
    • Good match for old hardware that you want to keep feeling “snappy”.
  • Kubuntu (Plasma)
    • Heavier than XFCE but quite efficient for a full‑featured DE.
    • You’re already happy with its performance, which is a good sign.
  • Ubuntu (GNOME)
    • Typically the heaviest of the three in RAM and GPU usage.
    • Might still be usable, but you will feel your 4 GB limit sooner, especially with a few browser tabs open.

So if performance is your top priority, Xubuntu is a very good suggestion. If you like Plasma’s features and can accept a bit more overhead than XFCE, sticking with Kubuntu is also a solid choice for that laptop.

If you mainly like the GNOME-style workflow (single top bar, app grid, etc.), you can get something similar on:

  • Xubuntu: with GNOME‑like themes and a single top panel + Whisker menu / app grid.
  • Kubuntu: by using a single panel and an “Application Dashboard”/GNOME‑like launcher.

This way, you keep performance closer to Xubuntu/Kubuntu levels instead of going to full GNOME.

---

Security: Ubuntu 24 LTS vs Ubuntu 25

On the security side, there are two different things:

  • Underlying security model (kernel, AppArmor, snap sandboxing, etc.).
  • User‑visible tools like the “Security” app you mention.

Some points to keep in mind:

  • LTS (e.g. 24.04)
    • Gets long-term security updates and backported fixes.
    • More conservative stack; fewer big changes during its lifetime.
    • If a serious exploit is found (in the updater or anything else), this is the version most likely to receive a timely patch.
  • Interim (e.g. 25.x)
    • Newer kernel, GNOME/Plasma, and security features.
    • May include new desktop security UX like the app you mentioned (per‑app file access prompts, improved portals, etc.).
    • Shorter support period and more frequent changes.

I can’t verify the exact “Security app” feature set in Ubuntu 25 or confirm that it will always prompt for Firefox accessing your home directory – my knowledge stops before that release. If that feature exists and you like that behaviour, it’s a point in favour of Ubuntu 25, but I wouldn’t choose it only on that basis.

From a pure risk management perspective on an old laptop:

  • If you want maximum stability and long-term patches: prefer 24.04 LTS (Xubuntu/Kubuntu/Ubuntu).
  • If you want to try the newer security UI/features and don’t mind being on a shorter‑lived release: test 25.x from a live USB and see if it runs well.

---

About your “red team exploit” in the Update app

I can’t verify your specific finding, but in general:

  • If your red team has found a real exploit in Ubuntu’s updater or related tooling, you should report it privately to Canonical (Ubuntu’s security team). That’s the best way to get it fixed and protect other users.
  • Whether it affects 24, 25, or both depends entirely on the exact bug and code path – that’s impossible to judge without details, and it’s not something I can safely speculate about.
  • If it is a genuine vulnerability, LTS releases normally get patches quickly once the vendor is informed.

So, instead of assuming “24 = insecure, 25 = secure”, it’s safer to:

  • Keep whichever version you use fully updated.
  • Report the issue to Canonical so both 24 and 25 can be patched if needed.

---

Practical recommendation for your laptop

Given everything (performance + security):

  • If you want the best performance on that hardware:
    • Xubuntu 24.04 LTS (or 25.x if you test it and it runs well).
    • Or stay on Kubuntu (which you already find fast) and tune effects down.
  • If you really want GNOME and the new security UX:
    • Try Ubuntu 25.x live and compare performance with your current Kubuntu.
    • Check whether the security prompts work the way you expect.
  • Whatever you choose:
    • Keep it fully patched.
    • If your red team exploit is real, responsibly disclose it to Ubuntu’s security team.

In short: for that specific laptop, I’d lean toward Xubuntu or Kubuntu 24.04 LTS for a balance of performance and long‑term security, and only move to Ubuntu 25 GNOME if you confirm via live testing that the performance and security features meet your needs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nunzio_77
@Bot

Just out of curiosity, where would Lubuntu rank in your personal ranking?

I tried Lubuntu many years ago, but it wasn't for me, as it was too limited at the time.
On that hardware, Lubuntu would actually sit at the very top of the “lightweight” list.

Rough ranking (lightest → heaviest)

On a Core 2 Duo, 4 GB RAM, old Radeon:

  • Lubuntu (LXQt) – usually the lightest
  • Xubuntu (Xfce) – still very light, a bit more “full‑featured”
  • Kubuntu (Plasma) – heavier but can be tuned down; you already find it fast
  • Ubuntu (GNOME) – typically the heaviest of these

So from a pure performance point of view, Lubuntu would be my first suggestion, Xubuntu a very close second.

Why Lubuntu can feel “limited” (and what’s changed)

Your old impression is common, especially from the LXDE days:

  • Lubuntu used to focus very hard on minimum resources and shipped with very basic defaults.
  • LXDE itself was quite minimal and could feel “bare bones”.

Nowadays:

  • Lubuntu uses LXQt (Qt‑based), which is more modern and integrates better visually.
  • It’s still simple and light, but less spartan than old Lubuntu.
  • You can install whatever apps you want; the “limited” feel is more about the default panel/tools than any real restriction.

Lubuntu vs Xubuntu: which makes more sense for you?

On your laptop:

  • Lubuntu
    • Slightly lighter than Xubuntu in RAM/CPU, especially at idle.
    • Very fast on old hardware.
    • Desktop is simpler; fewer built‑in customisation options than Xfce/Plasma.
  • Xubuntu
    • Still very light, but with a more feature‑rich and mature panel, settings, and plugins.
    • Often feels less “minimal” and more “general‑purpose desktop”.
    • Better choice if Lubuntu felt too limited and you don’t desperately need the last 100–200 MB of RAM.

How I’d decide in your case

Given you already found Lubuntu “too limited” in the past and you like richer environments like GNOME/KDE:

  • If you want maximum speed and don’t mind a very simple desktop: try Lubuntu again (it’s improved a lot with LXQt).
  • If you want a good balance of light + not‑too‑minimal: Xubuntu is probably your sweet spot.
  • If you’re happy with performance as it is and like the KDE feel: just stay with Kubuntu and maybe trim effects.

You can always boot Lubuntu and Xubuntu as Live USB on your Asus and compare RAM/CPU usage plus overall feel; that will make the ranking very obvious on your exact hardware.
 
Or try Debian with Gnome.
Then do: sudo apt install gnome-tweaks, to disable animation.

And if you don't do searches of your HDD, then: systemctl mask tracker-miner-fs-3.service .It is a search indexer.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Zero Knowledge
As bot pointed out, in terms of RAM usage KDE is lighter than GNOME. It's also lighter than Cinnamon (used by Linux Mint) and Mate, I think.
Xubuntu would be lighter and Lubuntu should be even more.
I think you should also try Zram in your system. Your OS would be able to hold more data into the memory if you use Zram.
Ubuntu based distros don't come with Zram by default. They use swap file by default, or some flavour may even use swap partition.
I have my script to quickly enable Zram. I can share that if you want.
Also, I would suggest using the LTS version of an Ubuntu based distro. It will be more stable, and you don't need the interim releases on your hardware.
 
Since I'm starting to like the GNOME desktop environment customized for Ubuntu, I'd like to install Ubuntu.
I knew you would love GNOME sooner or later, because after all, GNOME is the interface that distinguishes Linux from other operating systems.
Is the performance of the KDE Plasma desktop environment the same as that of GNOME in terms of RAM, CPU usage, etc.?
In my experience, I've always found GNOME lighter on the processor. As for RAM, GNOME might be heavier at startup, but it manages resources well, so you shouldn't have any problems with 4GB.
Also, from a performance perspective, which version of Ubuntu should I install: the LTS version or the 25.10 version?
In terms of performance, you won't find a difference between LTS and Normal, but in terms of errors, you may encounter them in the normal version, so it's best to use the LTS version.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nunzio_77
And I remember in the LTS version, you get that "dah-dah-dah-ding" sound during first usb stick boot, it was Ubuntu's decade anniversary. :)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nunzio_77

You may also like...