Linux is always a 2nd class citizen. While I applaud Intel's open source efforts, and they probably do have the best Open Source driver out of all the gfx manufacturers (Intel, AMD, Nvidia), even their OSS driver falls far short of the closed-source performance. 50% is a big hit to pay for OSS drivers, and yes, I know that AMD and Nvidia suffer more, but still, here's hoping that Intel can close the gap.
None of where Windows won. S3TC - usually a wash. Float textures - slower.
Originally Posted by WorBlux
So if the game actually used float textures, it'd have worse performance.
Originally Posted by fuzz
I do not think is a lot of time to install Sabayon a run the Phoronix suite - about half to 1 hour, if you use unetbootin or Multisystem - and Gentoo is, to have a 1000 Hz kernel running game tests.
Of course there are no PPA with a Ubuntu 1000 Hz kernel to test it fast.
It would be a great idea, I suggested it to Lorenzo Carbonell, el atareao, that does some pretty staff for ubuntu as contact lens, freecache, or google reader indicator. I hope he or any other one else would make a 1000 Hz kernel for ubuntu at his PPA.
But making a 1000 Hz Ubuntu kernel and add it to the benchmark is also a less than 30 minutes - 1 hour procedure, and you will have it done for future benchmarking - or at least a script to do it faster and easily-.
And of course, if you let Gentoo compiing, while you do other things, or all night it would be a great test.
The gentoo compiling time is a great indicator of how fast is a computer.
But Sabayon is a great aproach for desktop users, unfortunately there are no a PPA system for it, perhaps PPA developers should add arch, sabayon, debian and rpm packages letting the users to choose the distro.
And distros agreee to use a similar names for packages with different "surnames" or extensions, But that is other issue.
I want fair benchmarks and linux kernel for gaming compiled at 1000 Hz is far better, Ubuntu choose to compile the kernel at 100 Hz, gaming benchmark is unfair for Linux vs MS WOS if there are no other kernels compiled at 1000 Hz at the charts.
Last edited by mitcoes; 05-03-2012 at 04:34 AM.
Unity is 50% slower than any other DE - could you repeat using Mate/Cinnamon/KDE ???
I really quite liked testing Ubuntu 12.04 however I simply can't run it as my main desktop as ALL 3d full screen games are roughly 50% slower than in KDE4(with/without desktop effects) , Mate , Cinnamon,.
All the tests have proved is that Unity is crap (the absolute worst DE) for running games - if your a gamer avoid like the plague (or just have really slow games)
It is due to the fact you can't enable '"unredirect fullscreen windows" in compiz - if you do the FPS will be vastly improved (so unity is actually capable of running well) but on reboot unity will be broken... You can't enter the desktop
You either have to go in via unity 2D and disable it or manually edit ~/.gconf/apps/compiz-1/plugins/composite/screen0/options/%gconf.xml
At present I get about 40-50% extra fps in Fedora 16 (KDE), and Arch (Kde + Gnome3) than I do in Ubuntu 12.04 (unity) - unless I enable ' "unredirect fullscreen windows' - then if I forgot to disable it before logging out unity won't load.....
Ubuntu 12.04 with mate (gnome classic) is also fine - it is 100% a unity/compiz issue.
At present on an out the box 12.04 install a windows user will take one look at a 3d game in ubuntu and think - Well Linux is 1/2 the speed of windows.... (which is not true)
Also - unless I enable that option some graphics have anomalies
There is a bug report here
Your article suggests 'Linux' is slower - its not its is unity that is at fault,
Please re-test in a different DE and see if the results have changed
Shocking the superior OS won.
You mean Arch Linux ?
Originally Posted by soupbowl
Thats my point - thanks to unity people are going to get the wrong impression on Linux as a whole.
KDE4/gnome2/cinnamon would get faster results - on my machine (nvidia) win7 is slower than Arch/Fedora/Ubuntu (as long as you don;t use unity) in any benchmarks I do.
Oh not this kind of crap again, go on a random forum or linux gaming site and ask what people are using, it's almost always Ubuntu. If you are going by sites like distrowatch our numbers are heavily skewed as its a distro hopping geek site, most users don't distro hop, ever.
Originally Posted by schmidtbag
And I'm saying this as a Mint user. When I did run Ubuntu and I'd play games like Regnum Online back when the ONLY server was Ra, almost everyone on Linux ran Ubuntu, there was like 20 guys on the server that ran fedora and like 3 nuts on Gentoo, no other distro was used by anyone that was playing that in the year and a half I was playing Regnum.
Linux users where pretty well represented on Regnum at the time as it was pretty much the only native client MMO on Linux at the time.
All versions of Windows have an option somewhere in control panel that tells the OS whether to give higher priority to the foreground application or to the background tasks, and it defaults to foreground. Recently Linux has gained something similar, but it mostly works for text based applications ran from the console, when X11 is active I believe the X server will be getting the higher priority, not your game, as the kernel has no way to know which X application currently has the focus.
Originally Posted by StephanG
The most interesting point in win tests on ivb is that the opengl version is NOT 4.x but 3.x. But ivb is DX11 compatible, that means that the intel win developers are not really good at opengl... at least they can beat the linux team
Unity 15-20fps ... Metacity 95-105fps
I play quakelive a lot. On fullscreen (when I'm not even able to interact with the DE) in 12.04 Unity I get an unplayable 15-20 frames per second. A simple "metacity --replace &" and I'm running at 95-105fps or higher at times.
Originally Posted by schmidtbag
I like the look of unity but it kills fps on games for me. I don't know why it needs to be consuming so much when I'm in a fullscreen app, while Metacity doesn't. Hell even if they automatically switched to Metacity for fullscreen games and then back to Unity when exiting fullscreen, but it seems strange that such a thing would be necessary.
Last edited by gerrywastaken; 05-04-2012 at 06:06 PM.