3 ms·
VNC and RustDesk are both remote desktop solutions, however, Rustdesk is considerably more performant than the VNC family, because the latter primarily sends fr
by pizza234 2mo ago
VNC and RustDesk are both remote desktop solutions, however, Rustdesk is considerably more performant than the VNC family, because the latter primarily sends framebuffer updates, while the former can use modern video codecs and temporal compression to encode screen changes much more efficiently.
- shock 2mo ago> Rustdesk is considerably more performant than the VNC family It consumes, on the client, 800%-1200% CPU AND 8%-10% GPU decode on my NVIDIA card. I opened a bug and they transformed it into a discussion, without any response.
- embedding-shape 2mo ago> they transformed it into a discussion, without any response How dare they.
- LoganDark 2mo agoPerformant does not mean it uses less resources, it means it makes better use of the resources
- anakaine 2mo agoBetter is subjective. What is the bottleneck or resource allocation you're trying to overcome? Going on what the poster above says about CPU and memory - if the network speed or bandwidth allocation is the bottleneck, then trading CPU and memory utilisation increases for lower bandwidth is likely acceptable. If, however, the device is low end and tying up memory and CPU with compression would lead to sluggish or impaired task performance but the network has adequate overhead for lower levels of compression or higher levels of data transfer then higher network utilisation would be preferable. Different tools, different use case scenarios.
- shock 2mo agoPlease detail in what ways rustdesk "makes better use of the resources", so as to conclude that it is more performant. I'm curious to understand your perspective, since mine is very different.
- LoganDark 2mo agoI honestly don't have the experience to speak on whether it's actually more performant or not, since I don't trust networked screen sharing (I use a wired capture card exclusively). The only time I ever use networked remote desktop is when I can't be bothered to hook up the cables, or when I'm not physically close to the machine. However, I would say that high CPU or GPU usage is not necessarily an indicator of bad performance, especially since higher utilization can mean better performance.
- diego_moita 2mo agoI just have one word for you: TightVNC. That's what made me uninstall RustDesk.
- pizza234 2mo agoI have three words for you: read the docs. If you're experiencing a bug that pegs you're CPU, fair enough. But RustDesk is video-stream based (in many formats), while TightVNC is image(-region) based. This is actually similar to why you watch movies in, say, H.264 rather than Motion JPEG¹. ¹=similar, not same.
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- diego_moita 2mo ago> I have three words for you: read the docs. No, thanks. As they say: "the proof of the pudding is in the eating". So I used both applications and TightVNC is just a lot better, particularly in constrained remote VMs. Docs are cheap, performance is what matters.
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- embedding-shape 2mo ago> Docs are cheap, performance is what matters. How do you know if the performance you get is the expected, unless you read the docs or at least look at what others get on similar platforms/environments/specs?
- d3Xt3r 2mo agoI just have one word for you: Wayland
- wltr 2mo agoWhy not TigerVNC? https://tigervnc.org/ https://tigervnc.org/ > TigerVNC was originally based on the (never-released) VNC 4 branch of TightVNC. It seems to be popular, that’s why I’m asking.