Nvidia drivers performance vs Ati drivers

[sonnet]

I want ask if anyone made recently a comparison between nvidia drivers vs ati dirvers under linux.
Imagine two cards who have a equal performance index under Windows like radeon 4870 and geforce gtx 260.
If we rate this index 100, what rate they would rich respectively under linux with native games and wine-games ?

[Kano]

OpenGL games vary only a bit, usually less than 10%. But for well known DX games Win is MUCH faster. Especially due to driver optimizations specificly to a game. Even with a good Wine rendering the game maybe runs with the speed of a lowend gfx card on a much faster system.

[Qaridarium]

OpenGL games vary only a bit, usually less than 10%. But for well known DX games Win is MUCH faster. Especially due to driver optimizations specificly to a game. Even with a good Wine rendering the game maybe runs with the speed of a lowend gfx card on a much faster system.

the new openGL3.3 wine path shows very effectiv on amd cards.

for me it runs like nativ.

but yes to benchmark this its very hard.

[Kano]

DX via Wine is far from native performance, but for you everything is different.

[Panix]

For native games, does it matter? If it's 4870 v.s. GTS 250 or GTX 260?

I wouldn't play Windows games via Wine myself... but for native games, it is interesting (to me, anyway) if there is any difference.

However, even in Wine, it might be interesting to know if there's a difference with Windoze apps that aren't necessarily games.

[LinuxID10T]

I find that contrary to popular belief, that ATI drivers perform better in 3D. The hardware is also better these days. Quite frankly, fermi was a total flop. I will give nVidia credit where it is due though. In the Linux HTPC arena, nVidia does far better. Hopefully, ATI will be catching up soon though. In one of the other forum threads, it was suggested where the problem was with XvBA and the 5xxx series.

[Kano]

You tested yourself similar priced hardware from nv and ati? I would not consider fermi as flop. Compared to ATI similar NV cards are 10-30 € more expensive. As you need a bit power for tessellation much cheaper cards then you get now will not be able play games with DX11/OpenGL4 effects at full hd anyway. Of couse you can buy cheaper cards but then you will still only use OpenGL3 effects or it will be really slow. Do you really think a HD 5850 is better than a GTX 470 when you mainly use Linux?

[Qaridarium]

DX via Wine is far from native performance, but for you everything is different.

i test this in Starcraft2 beta!

[Qaridarium]

You tested yourself similar priced hardware from nv and ati? I would not consider fermi as flop. Compared to ATI similar NV cards are 10-30 € more expensive. As you need a bit power for tessellation much cheaper cards then you get now will not be able play games with DX11/OpenGL4 effects at full hd anyway. Of couse you can buy cheaper cards but then you will still only use OpenGL3 effects or it will be really slow. Do you really think a HD 5850 is better than a GTX 470 when you mainly use Linux?

nvidia is slower in Tesselation wen it comes to real games: http://www.geeks3d.com/20100528/test...70-vs-hd-5770/

[Kano]

First of all it is a pure Win engine and you are in a Linux forum. Also those benchmarks you found did NOT even compare the OpenGL 4 performance Win vs. Linux.