Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Linux is the fastest OS


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
9 replies to this topic

#1 abcdef44   Banned   -  Reputation: 2

Posted 09 November 2012 - 05:31 AM

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/nvidia-delivers-massive-performance-boost-to-linux-gaming-2012-11-06

This should leave Windows 8 behind by around 15% and OSX even more.

Sponsor:

#2 Ashaman73   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 6684

Posted 09 November 2012 - 05:48 AM

The fastest OS is not always the easiest to use or the best to sell.

#3 samoth   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 4496

Posted 09 November 2012 - 05:53 AM

This is a press release saying that they doubled the performance under Linux (they omit saying that it was roughly 1/2 the performance under Windows previously) followed by more marketing blah blah from some stock analyst.

I may have missed that part, but where does it say that Windows is left behind, with a single word?

#4 Bregma   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 4748

Posted 09 November 2012 - 06:10 AM

The performance of Linux-based operating systems on some hardware is indeed faster than other operating systems on the same hardware under some circumstances. No argument.
Stephen M. Webb
Professional Free Software Developer

#5 abcdef44   Banned   -  Reputation: 2

Posted 09 November 2012 - 06:13 AM

http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/linux/faster-zombies/

In my personal test with a GTX460 and even older driver, I got on X-plane with Win8 ~56 FPS but on Linux ~60 FPS. This is especially nice for WINE games, so they should
catch up with Windows. I'll try soon FSX after updating the driver.

#6 mhagain   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 7413

Posted 09 November 2012 - 06:28 AM

If you're going to post links like that you really should read them yourself first. The NV link says absolutely nothing about Linux being the fastest OS, just that they got a performance boost from their Linux drivers.

It's quite clear that you have a poor understanding of these matters so let me spell it out clearly: for GPU performance OS is almost completely irrelevant!

The determinants of performance will be (1) the GPU hardware itself, (2) the driver code, and (3) how sensible (or brain-dead) the program's usage of the 3D API is. It's true that under (2) some OS differences can matter, but they do not matter to as great an extent as you seem to think.

Stories about "I got X% extra performance under platform A with application Y" are not statistically valid - the plural of anecdote is not data. Come back to us when you've done testing of hundreds (or thousands) of different titles on multiple different hardware configurations and then we can talking about stuff in this direction.

Your enthusiasm for Linux is commendable, but behaviour like this is only damaging to your own credibility.

Edited by mhagain, 09 November 2012 - 06:31 AM.

It appears that the gentleman thought C++ was extremely difficult and he was overjoyed that the machine was absorbing it; he understood that good C++ is difficult but the best C++ is well-nigh unintelligible.


#7 SimonForsman   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 5752

Posted 09 November 2012 - 06:33 AM

The performance of Linux-based operating systems on some hardware is indeed faster than other operating systems on the same hardware under some circumstances. No argument.


of some Linux-based operating systems, strictly speaking each distribution is its own OS and there are fairly big performance differences between them (it primarily comes down to how the kernel, system libraries and X11 were built, Linux has a potential advantage in that you can get your kernel and most drivers(not nvidias though) optimized for the cpu you're using but some distributions are built for insanely old instructionsets to ensure compatibility with old hardware).
Also, valve primarily compared their OpenGL2 renderer with their D3D9(Which has a far higher per batch overhead than OpenGL or D3D10+) renderer (Allthough Linux did have a slight advantage compared to OpenGL2 on Win7 as well), There isn't much info on how OpenGL3-4 performs on the various platforms with nvidias drivers. (Did nvidia boost OpenGL performance across the board or did they just focus on Left 4 Dead specifically like they normally do with AAA titles ? Did the OpenGL improvements get ported over to the Windows driver before Valve did their tests ?).
It is nice to see that you can get good performance out of Linux though but getting drivers from one vendor optimized for one game using an old OpenGL version isn't enough(it might be a good start but we've had several of those in the past).

We saw fairly big boosts in OpenGL driver quality (primarily from AMD/ATI) when doom3 was released as well, it is in the time between the big name OpenGL titles that the quality tends to drop significantly (Windows and D3D doesn't suffer from this problem since new , big AAA titles are released all the time)

Edited by SimonForsman, 09 November 2012 - 06:37 AM.

I don't suffer from insanity, I'm enjoying every minute of it.
The voices in my head may not be real, but they have some good ideas!

#8 abcdef44   Banned   -  Reputation: 2

Posted 09 November 2012 - 07:00 AM

It's quite clear that you have a poor understanding of these matters so let m


Without reading all I guess you haven't read my link as well:
----
Left 4 Dead 2 is running at 315 FPS on Linux. That the Linux version runs faster than the Windows version (270.6) seems a little counter-intuitive, given the greater amount of time we have spent on the Windows version. However, it does speak to the underlying efficiency of the kernel and OpenGL. Interestingly, in the process of working with hardware vendors we also sped up the OpenGL implementation on Windows. Left 4 Dead 2 is now running at 303.4 FPS with that configuration.
---

Any yes I might post back, after testing X-Plane with newest drivers, by simply rebooting my machine.

Anyway my message is: Bye bye proprietary OS. ( and republicans Posted Image )

#9 L. Spiro   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 12212

Posted 09 November 2012 - 07:03 AM

Your enthusiasm for Linux is commendable

I have to disagree. The result of being a Linux fan often results in some kind of inferiority complex (have we been down this road recently?) that causes Linux fans to lash out and over-do support for said operating system.
That is actually validated by this very topic, in which a Linux fan has felt his or her system-of-choice has been under-appreciated and thus made a topic to try to gain some appreciation for that operating system.
Let’s assume we are in exactly the same situation as we are now, but Windows was proved to be the fastest. Does a Windows fanboy post such a topic by today’s standards? No. People who use Windows don’t need validation. It’s only the minority that wants to fight back and use any little thing they can to support their side of the table.

I actually hate all of them. Windows, Macintosh OS X, and Linux. I am definitely not a fan of any of them (at the same time admitting that I couldn’t make a better operating system than any of them). The only thing that matters to me is what games I can play on each system.
Any operating system that can’t run Starsiege: Tribes can fuck off.

This is what is funny about this thread. Within the console wars it has been stated billions of times for 10 years: It is not the hardware that makes success but the games.
Why would you ever even consider that this does not apply to the land of computers as well?
If Linux ran 100 times faster than Windows, I would still buy Windows because it runs the game(s) I want to play.
That is all there is too it.
Enough already.
We don’t care how fast your favorite operating system is.
Bragging about that gives you about X amount of pleasure, whereas playing my favorite game gives me X*X*X*X amount of pleasure.

Any game that goes beyond consoles and mobile invariably goes to Windows. Not Linux.
So no on really cares about Linux’s speed.
Go ahead and run Linux. Have fun calculating…stuff…faster than myself…
Enjoy that 1 millisecond-less of a delay when you open a folder.
Have fun with all that extra speed while I enjoy head-shotting people.


L. Spiro
It is amazing how often people try to be unique, and yet they are always trying to make others be like them. - L. Spiro 2011
I spent most of my life learning the courage it takes to go out and get what I want. Now that I have it, I am not sure exactly what it is that I want. - L. Spiro 2013
I went to my local Subway once to find some guy yelling at the staff. When someone finally came to take my order and asked, “May I help you?”, I replied, “Yeah, I’ll have one asshole to go.”
L. Spiro Engine: http://lspiroengine.com
L. Spiro Engine Forums: http://lspiroengine.com/forums

#10 samoth   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 4496

Posted 09 November 2012 - 07:22 AM


It's quite clear that you have a poor understanding of these matters so let m


Without reading all I guess you haven't read my link as well:
----
Left 4 Dead 2 is running at 315 FPS on Linux. That the Linux version runs faster than the Windows version (270.6) seems a little counter-intuitive

Anyway my message is: Bye bye proprietary OS. ( and republicans Posted Image )

I'm sorry, but the only message that I see is "I'm trolling". You cannot seriously claim "Linux is faster" based on a comparison of R270 drivers with R310 drivers. If anything, suggests that Linux R310 drivers now implement the same application-specific performance tuning for Left for Dead that Windows drivers received in R301.42, running at comparable speed now.

And again, Windows performance (or even Linux performance) is not mentioned with one word in that press release. All it really says is that they improved the performance of their drivers under Linux and that the nVidia guys are the best (what else to say in a press release).

Also, I fail to see how it is related to republicans.

EDIT:
I just remembered that I still have a GeForce4 Ti 4600 somewhere in the drawer. Maybe I should put it into a Linux box and run a benchmark against the 650Ti in my Windows box. That has about as much validity as comparing R270 vs R310 drivers.

Edited by samoth, 09 November 2012 - 07:27 AM.





Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS