Ubuntu quietly raises its minimum system requirements

https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2026/04/ubuntu-2604-system-requriments

You’ll need at least 6GB of RAM to run Ubuntu 26.04 LTS comfortably, as the upcoming version of the distro raises its minimum memory requirement for the first time since 2019.

123 points · 40 comments · view on lemmy.world

40 Comments

passenger@sopuli.xyz · 86 pts · 132d (10 replies)

No-one commenting seems to have read the article. They are raising the recommended specs due to desktop software and web sites being more resource intensive.

Edit: to add, I would not recommend 6GB RAM for desktop use to anyone. I would say the very minimum is 8GB nowadays.

pHr34kY@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 131d (4 replies)

Agreed. It's an uphill optimization battle. We're now in a world where you need 6GB RAM to chat on Discord while scrolling Facebook.

Ubuntu and its apps (particularly Firefox) are incredibly efficient and respects your hardware resources. I can write a web page with a 5MB RAM footprint. It's when you open the New York Times that your swapfile gets face-slapped.

Funnily enough, an Ubuntu server will run on a half-eaten potato. I've got 16GB in mine, and I'm running servers for LAMP (Nextcloud and Wordpress), NTP, Samba, Mail, Jellyfin, tor, XMPP, CUPS and a few other things. It typically uses around 2GB at idle.

Squizzy@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 131d (1 reply)

Novice here, is there a viewer mode that doesn't load all that bullshit

passenger@sopuli.xyz · 2 pts · 131d

Yes, firefox android has a reading mode. Unsure what it loads but it rules. Does not work on all pages but many benefit from it

Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 131d (1 reply)

Why did you call them LAMP?

airman@infosec.pub · 5 pts · 131d

Linux Apache MySQL PHP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LAMP_%28software_bundle%29

See also WAMP and MAMP. For windows and macOS

paraphrand@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 131d

How big could a websit… oh. Oh my.

HuudaHarkiten@piefed.social · 7 pts · 132d

I would say the very minimum is 8GB nowadays.

I had to check. I do have 8GB, wohoo!

nyan@lemmy.cafe · 3 pts · 132d

Depends on what you're doing. If you're okay with very limited Web use, even 2GB is viable (or was about a year ago when I retired that machine). More normal levels of Web use, you're going to need more RAM. Not sure about GPU-constrained loads like 3D modeling, as I never tried them on that machine. But other than those and some games, nothing on Linux should require even 8GB. Server systems can make do with even less.

XLE@piefed.social · 1 pts · 131d

The desktop software in question is GNOME, which is an integral part of the OS... So it's definitely true that part of the bloat is because the software running the OS itself is now using more RAM.

Mwa@thelemmy.club · 1 pts · 131d

Agreed.

vermaterc@lemmy.ml · 70 pts · 132d (4 replies)

AFAIK perfomance and low resource usage has never been a main objective of this distro

thisbenzingring@lemmy.today · 15 pts · 132d (3 replies)

Ubuntu is bloated

Debian requires at least 512MB of memory and 4GB of hard disk space for installation.

vermaterc@lemmy.ml · 21 pts · 132d (1 reply)

Memory requirements does not mean that something is bloated.

Windows XP required 64 MB of RAM. Does it mean Debian is bloated then?

towerful@programming.dev · 19 pts · 131d

2026 Debian Vs 2001 windows?
Or 2001 Debian Vs 2001 windows?

Cause 2001 Debian 2.2 was like 4MB ram, maybe 16 if you are really going for it!
https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/projects/omnibook/boot-floppies/current/doc/ch-hardware-req.en.html

So yeh, let's continue comparing apples and oranges.
FreeRTOS is bloatware cause we were able to orbit a sphere that could reflect radio waves with a bunch of tubes and a handful of germanium.

What the fuck is this "windows xp Vs modern Debian" shit?

pHr34kY@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 131d

There's a "minimal" install that gives you a bare desktop. The only thing I would consider bloatware is snapd.

PetteriPano@lemmy.world · 23 pts · 132d (7 replies)

I have an idea of how they could reduce the fish requirements.

How about using shared libraries instead of bundling everything in every snap all the times?

Amazingly it reduces RAM usage as well.

XLE@piefed.social · 19 pts · 132d (5 replies)

What is a reasonable number of fish though?

Lawnman23@piefed.social · 27 pts · 132d (3 replies)

3.5 lbs.

image

wltr@discuss.tchncs.de · 2 pts · 131d (2 replies)

How much is the fish?

Lawnman23@piefed.social · 2 pts · 131d (1 reply)

image

wltr@discuss.tchncs.de · 2 pts · 130d

My man!

PetteriPano@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 131d

Six-seven

AbidanYre@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 132d

You mean you don't like having three screens worth of squashfs entries flash past when you try to run mount?

slacktoid@lemmy.ml · 13 pts · 131d

So at this rate I'm about 10 years I'll need 9gigs of RAM? Thats not bad for what Ubuntu is.

lord_admiral@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 131d (1 reply)

What are you so surprised about? Ubuntu is aiming to replace Windows and is moving in a similar direction. The minimal effort required for installation and use is offset by the increased hardware requirements.

zaphod@sopuli.xyz · 3 pts · 131d

Minimal effort installation doesn't increase hardware requirements. The problem is bad desktop software and websites, you get the same problem with Gentoo.

TDCN@feddit.dk · 2 pts · 132d (7 replies)

Can we start calling Bloatbuntu like we call it Microslop

SapphironZA@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 132d

Ubloatu

bnalways733@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 131d

Ubundows

not_IO@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 131d

snapuntu

krigo666@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 132d (3 replies)

Slopbuntu.

CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 132d (2 replies)

Thats when the person to your right hands you a slobbery spliff during puff-puff-pass.

krigo666@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 132d (1 reply)

True. Have an upvote!

CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 132d

No, sorry, I got the spelling wrong. It slobluntu. My mistake. A portmanteau of slobbery blunt to you.

CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 132d (2 replies)

I’m not up on the flavours of Ubuntu, but I assume the LTS version is more server oriented and what in the name of whatever you hold holy is there that needs 6 GB to boot an OS? Have they ported bash to electron?

cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de · 5 pts · 132d (1 reply)

The server version requires 1.5 GB of RAM. That's still rather bloated considering Debian only requires 512 MB.

CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 132d

Well, that’s a lot more sensible but still rather fat. Good reminder not to install Ubuntu then.

tirateimas@lemmy.pt · 1 pts · 132d

I guess it was inevitable (for multiple reasons). Fortunately, there are lighter flavors of Ubuntu. For the more experienced unwilling to spend their resources this way, there are always other distros.

morto@piefed.social · -1 pts · 132d (1 reply)
[ removed ]
finalarbiter@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 9 pts · 132d

Read the article.

Raising the recommended RAM requirements is not because the Resolute Raccoon requires more resources than before, not directly – this is not a 2GB RAM jump solely to load the OS and nothing else.

Rather, it’s more of an honesty bump. Components that make up the distro – the GNOME desktop and extensions, modern web browsers (and the sites we load in them) and the kinds of apps we use (and keep running) whilst multitasking are more demanding.