GNOME vs XFCE

Hey
I want to know that which is better. GNOME or XFCE is every aspect.:grin:

Many of us are opinionated on this topic. Heavily.
But defining "better" becomes very problematic.
Only you can define what is better for / to you.

Personally, I prefer XFCE for reasons which are very well documented all over this forum.

I will note, while making a hasty exit... that the times are interesting in this regard. Before long, you may begin to see some very interesting complaints. About a certain D.E. A certain D.E. that is going full Microsoft on us all...

1 Like

Hmm I actually want to know that which one has a better experience, better community support and services, better software support, etc.
As I can think of its really difficult for you to tell me that which is better but you can consider these things.

Out of curiosity, I tried the Lite version on a thumb drive. Big step down. It just doesn't have the slick design of Core. If you're installing on an SSD, I'd go with Core even on a very old PC with 2 GBs. Your swap file will be fast anyway.

XFCE has great support with a community forum devoted to the D.E. across multiple distros. Toz is a legend:
https://forum.xfce.org/

It also has very easy to read and follow documentation in a wiki format:
https://wiki.xfce.org/start

XFCE is a fully fledged desktop, unlike Gnome. Gnome relies on independently produced "extensions" that Gnome detests and does not support - and may likely inhibit altogether, just as Gnome already has done with indie themes and theming.
For user experience, I prefer XFCE because it is a Full Desktop and because it allows greater user customization. It includes a Full Window Management system - which Gnome lacks.

Gnome is grossly unpolished. Widgets take on different sizes and proportions due to the lack of a Window Manager. Widget portions also can overlap and bleed into eachother. This is why only Flat or monochromatic themes work best on Gnome.

Gnome users can point out the benefits and perks of Gnome better than I can, due to my own biases.
However, Gnome is more integrated, Can be beatiful with the right themes and the extensions, while a con in one area, can be a huge pro (as it is now) by offering a large number of independent developed tools and functions that are very useful.

Swap performs the same way, regardless of desktop environment.

2 Likes

It depends on what you want and what works for you. I use both, i use xfce on my laptop , gnome on my desktop, My laptop needs a liteweight de as it is only a intel pentium wiht 8gb, and Zorin lite fits the bill perfectly. my desktop is running a ryzen 5700g w 48gb ram and has no issues utilizing all the features and then some that gnome has.

Gnome has a lot of extras with it, and lots of stuff designed for it so integrates very well. you can do the same for xfce but takes some diy. like Zorin connect works oob with gnome, in xfce you need to use kde connect, takes 5 mins to install and setup, for example.

Definitely XFCE if you want to use Zorin OS. I prefer GNOME if you are using a distro that comes with GNOME 40 or higher.

1 Like

If you want a slick modern lightweight desktop use Xfce
if you want a heavy modern and resource-hungry desktop use gnome(nobody wants that)
GNOME is far behind Xfce in case of performance and coustamizibilty
Gnome is just a beefy fat dude
I use personally Xfce

The above all is MY opinion you can just try both yourself and choose which is better for you

2 Likes

To be honest, I have used Pop!_OS, Manjaro KDE, Mint XFCE and Fedora 35 when I was away from Zorin OS and what I have observed is that all three of them GNOME 41, KDE Plasma 4.22 (I think) and XFCE 4.16 consumed almost the same amount of resource on a core i5, AMD Radeon, 4GB RAM computer with KDE Plasma consuming slightly lesser than XFCE and XFCE consuming slightly lesser than GNOME. But overall XFCE and GNOME were more stable and responsive than KDE Plasma. I think, gone are the days when GNOME used to be "just a beefy fat dude".

1 Like

I havn't noticed that Gnome is a resource hungry dude, yes it uses a couple of more RAM than XFCE but we're talking about ~300mb in difference on my system. But modern system comes with at least with 16 GB RAM these days. Granted if you got a laptop that have its days back in Pharaohs 3. dynasty, then XFCE is recommended.

4 Likes

:joy: What a joke

Okay,
In one of my laptops with 4 gb of ram
Gnome is taking 1.2GB of ram
Xfce is taking only 520 MB approx of ram
I see this as a huge difference
Gnome is still not a perfect D.E in case of ram management

Gnome is more resource intensive.
However, the Gnome Developers deserve credit on this one; they have tweaked Gnome to be very light on its feet, in spite of its bulk.
There are whole pages on the internet on how they did this and the effect it had.

1 Like

Ooh Ooh another thing..
GNOME currently (although not more customizable) has more features..not as many as KDE but more than Cinnamon,MATE and XFCE. Aye GNOME apps are simple and not feature rich but the desktop itself has more features.

With 4 GB I surely recommend XFCE, then 300-500MB is huge. But on my system it's a drop in the water which I don't notice. But I think the real problem is the modern browser these days that eat memory as a fat kid in a candyshop.

1 Like

Agreed some of the gnome apps are life changers (in my it was gnome-boxes, gnome network displays, and many more ) but you can install them in any desktop environment other than gnome
I am not complaining about gnome D.E. I personally don't like it you guys can have different choices

It is just a secondary laptop

I use edge because of 2 things

  1. It uses fewer resources compared to other browsers I have tried
  2. I want to let Microsoft know that I am using Linux not their damn windows
1 Like

None of my messages were directed to you directly...I just cleared some things out and provided some additional information. If you know me...I like clarifying things and correcting others by providing current information.

1 Like

Me too. But I don't use Edge anymore. LOL.