Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 109

Thread: Valve Writes About Their Linux Client Plans

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,353

    Default Valve Writes About Their Linux Client Plans

    Phoronix: Valve Writes About Their Linux Client Plans

    Finally some non-Phoronix exclusive information about Steam/Source Engine on Linux ;) Valve Software has begun to write about their Steam Linux client initiatives on their public blog...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTE0MTU

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    205

    Default

    Nice! I hope they will make native 64 bit ports, not 32 bit multilib crap.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    Nice! I hope they will make native 64 bit ports, not 32 bit multilib crap.
    I guess it depends much about the windows and mac client. If they dont have 64 client on those the change it would be 64 is very slim

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    205

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dehir View Post
    I guess it depends much about the windows and mac client. If they dont have 64 client on those the change it would be 64 is very slim
    That would be a shame. We have 2012, I don't see the point at all in running 32 bit software on a 6-core machine with 16GB RAM and I don't want to pollute my pure 64 bit install with 32 bit libs. If they only make a 32 bit client I think I will go for triple boot: Windows, Linux for gaming (32 bit with PAE kernel), Linux for serious work (64 bit).

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    598

    Default

    Hello Everybody ....1st post here

    Yes it's true....i registered finally at Phoronix only because of Valve plans for Linux

    As for 32bit vs 64bit....well....i have to agree that there is NOTHING wrong with a 32bit-only client and games !!!

    1st of all, no matter we are at 2012, ALL AAA games in Windows are 32bit even if dev recommends for some titles that we play in a 64bit version of Windows.

    2nd, with PAE extensions, 32bit UBUNTU is FASTER than 64bit UBUNTU, IIRC the results of tests.
    Last edited by AJSB; 07-17-2012 at 07:26 AM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Czech Republic
    Posts
    165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJSB View Post
    Hello Everybody ....1st post here

    Yes it's true....i registered finally at Phoronix only because of Valve plans for Linux

    As for 32bit vs 64bit....well....i have to agree that there is NOTHING wrong with a 32bit-only client and games !!!

    1st of all, no matter we are at 2012, ALL AAA games in Windows are 32bit even if dev recommends for some titles that we play in a 64bit version of Windows.

    2nd, with PAE extensions, 32bit UBUNTU is FASTER than 64bit UBUNTU, IIRC the results of tests.
    And the response from Steven Rostedt about 32bit kernel on 64bit machine:
    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Rostedt
    "Idiot! Why the f*ck are you running i386 on your nice shiny new x86_64
    machine, with Umpteen Gigs of RAM. Boot a x86_64 kernel for Christ sake
    and get your full potential. Your i386 userspace will still work just
    fine on it. You're like one of those 75 year old retirees that can
    finally buy a Porsche just to drive it 10 miles per hour below the speed
    limit with a line of cars behind them!"

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJSB View Post
    Hello Everybody ....1st post here

    Yes it's true....i registered finally at Phoronix only because of Valve plans for Linux

    As for 32bit vs 64bit....well....i have to agree that there is NOTHING wrong with a 32bit-only client and games !!!

    1st of all, no matter we are at 2012, ALL AAA games in Windows are 32bit even if dev recommends for some titles that we play in a 64bit version of Windows.

    2nd, with PAE extensions, 32bit UBUNTU is FASTER than 64bit UBUNTU, IIRC the results of tests.
    It depends largely on the benchmark.

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...u_32_pae&num=1

    The only advantage of the 32 bit binary, is that it tends to have a smaller memory footprint, and most such systems are without the trappings of multilib or multiarch.

    The x32 abi may very well be the default within three years. Almost as small a footprint, but access to additional registers and instructions.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    205

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJSB View Post
    1st of all, no matter we are at 2012, ALL AAA games in Windows are 32bit even if dev recommends for some titles that we play in a 64bit version of Windows.

    2nd, with PAE extensions, 32bit UBUNTU is FASTER than 64bit UBUNTU, IIRC the results of tests.
    1. Open world games would benefit from having the possibility to address more than 3GB RAM.
    2. Point 1 makes this point meaningless. Who cares how fast PAE is, try to run a VM with 4GB RAM on it. Again, some games would really benefit from using a 64 bit client.

    It shouldn't be that hard to compile a program for 32 and 64 bit and let the user decide which one to use (or some kind of automatism in the installer).

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    That would be a shame. We have 2012, I don't see the point at all in running 32 bit software on a 6-core machine with 16GB RAM and I don't want to pollute my pure 64 bit install with 32 bit libs. If they only make a 32 bit client I think I will go for triple boot: Windows, Linux for gaming (32 bit with PAE kernel), Linux for serious work (64 bit).
    /eyeroll

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Valve to purchase Ubuntu?

    I kid, but seriously. While likely to anger many, the distro lock-in seems like a decent strategy, as it answers the initial doubts over "all the distros are different so it will break" from naysayers. I guess that means they can also run hand-in-hand with the major update rollouts. Will Steam update itself internally (like in Windows), or will it go through Update Manager like Firefox and Chromium? Seems exciting to see how it goes, even if I don't play a single game.

    Even if Steam is a little buggy, that's not too bad. It has always crashed on my Windows systems if I run the games long enough, and those are rock-solid builds with good parts.

Posting Permissions

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