Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 38

Thread: NVIDIA GT 425M: Windows 7 Ultimate vs. Ubuntu 10.10

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,354

    Default NVIDIA GT 425M: Windows 7 Ultimate vs. Ubuntu 10.10

    Phoronix: NVIDIA GT 425M: Windows 7 Ultimate vs. Ubuntu 10.10

    Back in August we looked at the gaming performance between Windows 7 and Ubuntu 10.04 using a Lenovo ThinkPad W510, and the results were not too dramatic, but since then there has been a new release of Ubuntu (the 10.10 Maverick Meerkat) and new graphics hardware has been released. After receiving an ASRock Vision 3D system recently, which will soon be reviewed at Phoronix, we decided to compare its performance of the brand new GeForce GT 425M graphics processor under Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate x64 and Ubuntu 10.10 x86_64.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=15389

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Hi, if I'm not mistaken the 260.19.06 NVIDIA drivers are/were Beta?

    Why weren't the 260.19.12 drivers used?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gmcclelland View Post
    Hi, if I'm not mistaken the 260.19.06 NVIDIA drivers are/were Beta?

    Why weren't the 260.19.12 drivers used?
    Ubuntu 10.10 installs 260.19.06 by default.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Sorry, I just remembered using 260.19.06 beta drivers when using 10.04 that's all.

    I would assume little to no difference in performance between 260.19.06 and 260.19.12 then?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    119

    Default Quake Live Tests

    Today Quake Live is the most played OpenGL Cross plattform Game.
    It can be played in Linux with Firefox, and in MS WOS with Firefox and MSIE.

    I think gamers would like to see benchmarks, not only between MS WOS 7 and Ubuntu, include ARCH, Gentoo, Sabayon, SUSE, and other popular distros. 32 and 64 bits.

    As hard gamers like to play in slower resolutions 640x480 and 800x600 because there are no dropped frames - and there are a lot in higher resolutions - Linuxes would beat a lot MS WOS 7 and perhaps a lot of gamers would install Linuxes for playing Quake Live and other online FPS games.

    In Spanish we say "Are you my friend or lion's one?" - ¿Eres amigo mio o de león? when your friend is not on your side.

    This same test, with Quake Live with Ubuntu beating MS WOS 7 in low res would have a espectaclar scope "UBUNTU READY FOR HARD GAMERS".

    And of course Quake Live has different configurations, the important ones for harD gamers are 640x480 and 800x600 with pro configs - minimal effects config - and also you can test medium and full features for each resolution. Perhaps pro configs would run also faster in higher resolutions in Linuxes than in MS WOS systems.

    I know a lot of Live Quake gamers that would change inmediately to any Linux distro if they read that is much faster than their MS WOS computers.

    And of course, they would like to download the tests for their own machines.

    Please do it, It will make me happy to make this hardgamers friends change to any Linux distro.

    The second question is How can MS WOS improve so much in higher resolutions?
    The method is dropping frames - a trick, not a real test - or what else?
    Then this test mudt have dropped frames and other triks usd by OSs to evaluate results.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mitcoes View Post
    The second question is How can MS WOS improve so much in higher resolutions?
    The method is dropping frames - a trick, not a real test - or what else?
    Then this test mudt have dropped frames and other triks usd by OSs to evaluate results.
    Nothing new. Drivers are optimized for specific resolutions. In the past this was 1024x768. I suppose today it's higher.

    Btw, no, gamers don't use low resolutions. You're still stuck in the MS-DOS days.

    Also, Quake is hardly a reason for anyone to switch to Linux. Gamers want Fallout 3, F1 2010, the upcomming Dragon Age, etc, etc, not Quake Live that's just the ancient Quake 3 Arena but in a browser.

  7. #7

    Default

    Another useless comparison.

    Linux is not a gaming platform. At best it can be used to run Windows games under Wine, but in this case no valid and realistic comparisons can be carried out because Wine semi-accurately emulates DirectX calls using OpenGL.

    Unless Linux has at least 10% market share I highly doubt anything is going to change.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mitcoes View Post
    Today Quake Live is the most played OpenGL Cross plattform Game.
    It can be played in Linux with Firefox, and in MS WOS with Firefox and MSIE.

    I think gamers would like to see benchmarks, not only between MS WOS 7 and Ubuntu, include ARCH, Gentoo, Sabayon, SUSE, and other popular distros. 32 and 64 bits.

    As hard gamers like to play in slower resolutions 640x480 and 800x600 because there are no dropped frames - and there are a lot in higher resolutions - Linuxes would beat a lot MS WOS 7 and perhaps a lot of gamers would install Linuxes for playing Quake Live and other online FPS games.

    In Spanish we say "Are you my friend or lion's one?" - ¿Eres amigo mio o de león? when your friend is not on your side.

    This same test, with Quake Live with Ubuntu beating MS WOS 7 in low res would have a espectaclar scope "UBUNTU READY FOR HARD GAMERS".

    And of course Quake Live has different configurations, the important ones for harD gamers are 640x480 and 800x600 with pro configs - minimal effects config - and also you can test medium and full features for each resolution. Perhaps pro configs would run also faster in higher resolutions in Linuxes than in MS WOS systems.

    I know a lot of Live Quake gamers that would change inmediately to any Linux distro if they read that is much faster than their MS WOS computers.

    And of course, they would like to download the tests for their own machines.

    Please do it, It will make me happy to make this hardgamers friends change to any Linux distro.

    The second question is How can MS WOS improve so much in higher resolutions?
    The method is dropping frames - a trick, not a real test - or what else?
    Then this test mudt have dropped frames and other triks usd by OSs to evaluate results.
    You forgot to mention that there is a 125 FPS cap. Combined with the fact that most people (including me) play with shitty resolutions + gfx settings comparable with a lego world + 10 years old engine, there is no need to improve anything performance wise.

    What i actually did to improve the game experience is to set usbhid.mousepoll=1 on kernel command line to force 1000hz polling of my mouse. Also poking around with net rmem / wmem min/max/default makes some difference in hit recognition. Although i have yet to find the "optimal" settings.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by birdie View Post
    Another useless comparison.
    Perhaps. I see less use in it than some.

    Linux is not a gaming platform. At best it can be used to run Windows games under Wine, but in this case no valid and realistic comparisons can be carried out because Wine semi-accurately emulates DirectX calls using OpenGL.
    Now, I'm hurt. The only reason it's "not a gaming platform" is solely because studios won't port games to it. The "fragmentation" argument is BS- and many problems for producing good binaries for all distributions and 32/64-bits are typically self-inflicted. WINE's a band-aid and should really only be used for things that won't get ported over. Old stuff. Mainly because of the very thing you comment to.

    Unless Linux has at least 10% market share I highly doubt anything is going to change.
    Heh... Hate to disillusion you there- but we're already at that threshold according to something Ballmer showed people this year. You can actually do the math yourself- but someone else has done it for you:

    http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2010/09...he-1-myth.html

    If you accept the figures that the industry pundits give on Netbooks, just for starters, the floor for shipped units using Linux (nobody will typically go out of their way to buy a Linux netbook and put Windows on it, sorry...) if you go off of the official shipped Netbook figures, is 6% of the total estimated market. That's the minimum and only using netbooks for a figure. The figure is quite a bit higher than that, obviously, because there's more than just netbooks out there.

    You're AT the 10% figure you talk to- and there's some changes going on in the background that might change the story you're talking to.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Svartalf View Post
    Now, I'm hurt. The only reason it's "not a gaming platform" is solely because studios won't port games to it.
    Indeed. But as you say yourself, this means Linux is not a gaming platform The reason doesn't really matter to players.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •