Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 38

Thread: A Low-Latency Kernel For Linux Gaming

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,782

    Default A Low-Latency Kernel For Linux Gaming

    Phoronix: A Low-Latency Kernel For Linux Gaming

    Within the Phoronix Forums and elsewhere it has been brought up that using a low-latency kernel can improve the Linux gaming performance, but is this really the case? In this article are some simple benchmarks comparing the stock Ubuntu 12.04 LTS "generic" Linux kernel compared to Ubuntu's low-latency flavor of Linux.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=17506

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Florianopolis, Brazil
    Posts
    54

    Default

    It may be that what people are talking about in terms of improved gaming "performance" is not the framerate (which unsurprisingly does stay unchanged or degrades a bit with preemption enabled - let alone if one was to install a proper -rt kernel). However you might experience a situation where overall latency decreases which might improve responsiveness to input devices, or the overall "smoothness" of the game might feel more right. Call it trading off excess fps for equal low latency access (who really cares if you are pushing 172 fps if your mouse jerky, when it could all be smooth at say 160 fps).

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    100

    Default

    When I hear about low-latency kernels I think of audio and near-realtime industrial control. I think in terms of one or two milliseconds or less for latency, performance levels necessary for those applications, but at or beyond the bleeding edge of human reflexes. At the same time, there are very real compromises necessary in order to get this fast latency, and those compromises can hurt throughput. There's a reason that realtime kernels are not used for general-purpose computing. There's a reason that the low-latency kernel is not the default, and it's not because Ubuntu doesn't think we're 133t enough to use it.

    In other words, unless you know exactly why you need a low-latency kernel, and unless you know what kinds of latencies you need, you don't really need a low-latency kernel. "I'm really fast! I don't want my computer to limit me." just doesn't cut it. (or even make sense in this context)

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    677

    Default

    Thanks for the info

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    78

    Default

    Why does this retarded article not measure frame jitter instead? The entire point of a low latency kernel combined with a effective IO manager is that your game application gets consistent troughput with low latency instead of being random.
    Why can't phoronix suit measure framejitter(frame jitter, etc)? Techreport already did it quite well.


    Edit:

    phred14, I have a small guess. Realtime is not a standard in OSes because of legacy. In the old day of computing, a realtime system or a less laggy system as one could put it had one major gripe: It consumed too much computing power, meaning it would be unfavorable.
    Then again, jitter from OS side is usually at <1ms, which is not significant, but if we can get a application which has severe input issues and jitter, we might be able to show just how much a more updating kernel is capable of remedying the problem.
    Last edited by del_diablo; 06-22-2012 at 06:00 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by del_diablo View Post
    Why does this retarded article not measure frame jitter instead? The entire point of a low latency kernel combined with a effective IO manager is that your game application gets consistent troughput with low latency instead of being random.
    Why can't phoronix suit measure framejitter(frame jitter, etc)? Techreport already did it quite well.
    Yes I did not understand that either.
    I would expect a low latency kernel to have a lower average framerate, but I would also expect less jitter.
    I don't see the point of the article...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,676

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phred14 View Post
    I think in terms of one or two milliseconds or less for latency, performance levels necessary for those applications, but at or beyond the bleeding edge of human reflexes.
    Just for the record the median perception time is at about 100ms. The average reaction time is about 250ms (usually more depending on a number of factors).

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 89c51 View Post
    Just for the record the median perception time is at about 100ms. The average reaction time is about 250ms (usually more depending on a number of factors).
    Which is blatantly false. A monitor does not need such a severe input lag as 100ms before it becomes noticable. All you need to do, is that you have a jitter of 1ms --> 10ms --> 1ms --> 10ms, and it should be noticable that the input is quite unsmooth, especially if you are testing a application where the input matters(hardcore quake FPS anybody?).
    Nevermind that once you have gotten the mind into "ready mode", and are into a "flow of actions", the static reaction times is no longer there. Now... the 100ms median is true if you are waiting for twitching. But if you are in a constant twitching movement, in a state where you already have processed all the information, 100ms not your reaction time.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    122

    Default

    Most serious competitive gamers will attempt to reduce latency and minimise jitter in latency. Course, those gamers won't be using linux because the platform simply doesn't support their games, but if it was they'd be looking for ways to minimise input lag.

    It has nothing to do with FPS, but it's fairly trivial to see the difference in input lag between 250fps and 125fps whilst playing a q3 engine game. There may be more to it, but actual mouse pointer consistency can get seriously messed up from a gamer reacting to whats happening on his screen without a consistant system.

    The average person denies its possible for a couple of ms difference to actually affect performance, but almost every high end gamer (ie, the people who win money at tournaments) would agree with what I said above.

    For the record, playing a windows game with rawinput usually mean you're got a consistant gaming experience which leads to a much higher level of skill, and is obviously noticeable when you look at the people playing the games.

    On the other hand, without directinput / rawinput the entire windows pointer system seems to be awful and crappy, and inconsistant in windows 7 to the point where I can be successful in XP with no acceleration fixes, but not so in windows 7.

    I'm hoping steam for linux games have some kind of rawinput, because despite being a linux fanboy, I won't be gaming with it if I can't aim.

    FYI, if we're seriously talking about 30ms kernel, I'd suspect we're seriously being way too slow already. We're talking about a group of people who raise their USB polling rates from 8ms to 1-2ms, using monitors than need to have < 10ms lag, and playing at high FPS (thus meaning < 10ms delay between screens) with generally 100hz+ refresh rates. A 30ms responce time is already way too slow, though I suppose thats a maxiumum as opposed to an average.
    Last edited by ownagefool; 06-22-2012 at 06:55 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    229

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by del_diablo View Post
    Which is blatantly false. A monitor does not need such a severe input lag as 100ms before it becomes noticable. All you need to do, is that you have a jitter of 1ms --> 10ms --> 1ms --> 10ms, and it should be noticable that the input is quite unsmooth, especially if you are testing a application where the input matters(hardcore quake FPS anybody?).
    I want your hardware that jitters between 100-1000 frames/s...

Posting Permissions

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