Gaming Benchmarks: Windows 7 vs. Ubuntu Linux
Phoronix: Gaming Benchmarks: Windows 7 vs. Ubuntu Linux
At the beginning of this month we published workstation benchmarks comparing Windows 7 to Ubuntu Linux. In those tests, which were a continuation of tests from earlier this year when looking to see whether Windows 7 is faster than Ubuntu 10.04 and how fast is Windows compared to Mac OS X and Linux, the two operating systems performed quite closely in our workstation tests with only a few exceptions. Today, however, we are back to looking at the Linux vs. Windows performance of the Lenovo ThinkPad W510 and this time we are looking at the OpenGL gaming performance between Windows 7 Professional and Ubuntu 10.04 LTS.
Thanx for benchmarking, these results are very helpful, but please do include ATI Catalyst benchmarks as well.
To me it doesn't seem very good idea to include Mesa vs NVIDIA/ATI drivers on different platforms and then conclude that other OS is faster, but additional article with Catalyst is very much needed!
The first thing I would have done after getting that laptop is removing the Windows stickers
But yeah Windows 7 is marginably faster. This keeps comming as a shock to me. Of course Linux got more layers for data integrity and other features and functionality, but the fact that Microsoft could have tamed the Windows beast to be faster than Linux is realy unacceptable!
I think it is relevant also making these benchmarks with catalyst/fglrx. It might show up with comparable results between windows and linux.
It shouldn't. Both Windows and Linux are great operating systems. Windows just has much more optimized graphics-drivers. Hence you cannot run Crysis on Linux ;-)
Originally Posted by V!NCENT
I'd love to see wine benchmarks as well.
You seems to be forgetting how hard it is for Microsoft to still produce something useful that:
Originally Posted by MartjeB
A. is backwards compatible;
B. has new design.
Doing anything with that codebase, while remaining backwards compatibility and adding layers on top of the crap that is remaining from the Windows 95 days, while imrpoving speed at the same time _IS_ shocking.
I am wondering when the Windows cardhouse will become so full of ducttape that it collapses. All older people working on Windows have already quit or are quiting (except a single kernel dev) and so the knowledge gets lost. To top all that Microsoft has nothing else to make them a lot of money. Office for Mac is funny, but the real succesor to Word 97-2003 docs is ODF.
Can't... it... just... die... already?
According to the interview with the NVIDIA linux dev team posted here some time ago, more than 90% of their driver code base is the same for both platforms IIRC.
Originally Posted by MartjeB
From the test cases it seems like windows is doing better at high resolutons. If this is due to those 10% porting layer differences in NVIDIAs drivers or better windows interrupt/dma/io/whatever handling would be interesting to know.
Thanks for a good benchmark btw. As others pointed out if would be nice to see an ATI test. However, what would be the most fair driver suite to run on each platform? How is GL support for ATI on windows platforms compared to their D3D support?
I'm surprised somwhat... but maybe not.
High-end OpenGL performance is the one graphics area I expected Linux to actually beat Windows. I saw the results and assumed that the card was a consumer level GeForce-equiv, but it wasn't. Now, I would assume that since these were gaming benchmarks and not CAD, that that would be the reason for the Linux loss.
Originally Posted by phoronix
Now, it is my understanding that Windows no longer has to convert all OpenGL instructions to Direct3D, thus they can get similar performance, but to beat Linux by this much... again, I am guessing this is b/c these tests aren't making extensive use of double precision.
Does anyone know something concrete?
While most of the 90% of the code could be the same it doesn't mean the code isn't optimized for Windows.
Originally Posted by mathiasp