| ▲ | paaloeye 4 hours ago |
| AFAIK, Ghostty is as performant. At least, on macOS. I used both and didn't see much difference. Decided to go with Ghostty as it feels more native than Kitty. |
|
| ▲ | TheRoque 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Yeah from what I've seen Ghostty is slightly more performant but they are both very performant. |
|
| ▲ | mstaoru 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| How does a non-performant terminal look? I don't think I've even seen one. Serious question. |
| |
| ▲ | TheRoque 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Print a massive log file in kitty/ghostty, and another one with you default terminal, and you'll see a massive difference in how fast the log is printed out. Well to be honest it's just comfort, I can't claim it makes a difference in actual productivity, for me the real benefits of kitty are just the terminal multiplexer-ish capabilities (panes, sessions), other rendering niceties like adjusting the font, or having smooth scroll, sensible default shortcuts. But the actual "performance" e.g. input lag or rendering lag, I don't think it's that important. | |
| ▲ | XYen0n 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I have previously seen programs run much more slowly when launched from the built-in terminal in a JetBrains IDE because log output was blocked. | |
| ▲ | devsda 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | iterm2. When there's heavy logging, I've seen it lag. Doesn't feel as snappy as Kitty. |
|
