ATI: Linux vs. Windows Vista
Phoronix: ATI: Linux vs. Windows Vista
Since AMD introduced their new Linux display driver last month, we have published a number of different articles looking at the Radeon performance across their different GPU product generations. This ATI/AMD Linux driver testing and exploration continued this month with the release of the 8.42 driver, which finally introduced AIGLX support for the fglrx driver. One area though we haven't yet analyzed is how their official Linux driver now compares to their much-optimized Windows Catalyst driver. Today, however, we will be looking just at that as we compare the ATI Radeon HD 2900XT 512MB performance under Linux and Microsoft Windows Vista.
I must be dreaming.. This can't be true...
A bit more details in the test would have been good, like what version of DirectX was running on Vista if 10 then I guess the game looked better on vista than on linux which comes at a cost of fps's. Dont want to come off as some windows fanboy but usually these kind of tests dont tend to hold up when examined with microscopes....but yes I thought I was dreaming too
That huge performance difference in ET:QW may be caused by a faulty linux driver.
Performance in X² - The Threat increased greatly between 8.40 and 8.42 on my system, but now particles from engine jets render as white billboards (before, particles were the main cause of slowdowns).
Also, I get an interlaced screen when I run it at 1280x1024.
Who knows what other things fglrx doesn't do, which results in increased performance/decreased visual quality.
But then again, 8.42 still seems geared towards r600, and I have an r500 (x1950pro) ...
As pessimistic as I'd love to be, I'm not going to be as pessimistic.
...white billboards, LOL. If those were real, you could use your exhaust as weaponry
Anyways, at this point I wouldn't say that they're "cheating", but just that they still need many more releases to improve and fix current (and future bugs). We do know they're on a new code base, so it is possible that it's a problem with a driver, not an intentional cheat.
...but time will tell.
[In any case, I'm happy to see Linux pwning Vista. Thanks, that's all from me]
I'd really like to seen screen by screen comparisons of the same sittings to verify that everything looks exactly the same. As amazing as the results are, I don't think I'll buy just yet...
I don't know much about this game, but to keep the results fair, both instances of the game should have been using OpenGL. Although performance between D3D and OpenGL is in theory very similar, it really depends on the machine the two are running.
Last edited by Morlyn; 10-30-2007 at 03:31 PM.
There's probably some missing rendering operations going on there. In theory, the codebase is mostly the same (if you buy their PR...), so any differences will be due to better fits with one or the other- or missing functionality.
Looking at the fps numbers, I'd say that rendering of ET:QW on Windows was synchronized to screen refresh (60 Hz), while on Linux that was not the case (is OpenGL vsync even supported in these drivers?). Make sure vsync is not enabled in Windows drivers or game settings and test again, please.
If vsync issues and other potential rendering problems are ruled out, the results seem very impressive indeed.
Last edited by deneb; 10-30-2007 at 03:52 PM.
the results are pretty impressive.
though, i'm not really surprised. the enemy territory for what i've read around is based on a new engine that isn't optimized specifically for dx10, since they're limited to vista and there are still a lot of xp users that in that case wouldn't be able to play it. since the engine is new and studied to express the full potential of a graphic board it would interesting a benchmark of the same game and settings with the new nvidia driver under linux and windows and a confrontation between the 2 leading graphic producers. i'm prepared to bet a little sum on the nvidia linux driver also beating the vista one.
remember that vista is still a fresh system of microsoft and as that it's still in its beta test phase. only after the first sp maybe it will be a good one.
now, let's return to the bench themselves:
are there texture errors or tearing during normal use of the system with the new ati drivers?! if you didn't experienced issues, may this be caused by fact that the last releases of the driver are optimized to work with the r600 series?! this could really be a reason why the new driver performs so well with the hd board.
and as a test, it would be nice if an amd64 or ia64 version could be tested, since the number of linux users using a 64bit version distro is quite high. how do these games perform with a 64bit version distro?
Heh... This would be a given, considering that the 8.41 driver set was officially only R600- you were dead on your own if you used it with anything else and they actually blocked certain classes of chipsets because they really weren't sure the code would work right on the chip or they were dead certain it'd crash in some very embarrassing ways. Now, having said this, I want, somehow, to get to the bottom of this little interesting turn of events- is it because of missing pieces in the driver's support of OpenGL 2.X or is it because the implementation meshes MUCH better with Linux with those games?
Originally Posted by givemesugarr