Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Radeon R9 290 On Ubuntu 14.04 With Catalyst Can Beat Windows 8.1

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    And also read a history of Mesa3D, maybe that is why mesa traditionaly plays good on Quake engine games .

    May 13, 1999

    May 1999 - John Carmack of id Software, Inc. has made a donation of
    US$10,000 to the Mesa project to support its continuing development.
    Mesa is a free implementation of the OpenGL 3D graphics library and id's
    newest game, Quake 3 Arena, will use Mesa as the 3D renderer on Linux.

    The donation will go to Keith Whitwell, who has been optimizing Mesa to
    improve performance on 3d hardware. Thanks to Keith's work, many
    applications using Mesa 3.1 will see a dramatic performance increase
    over Mesa 3.0. The donation will allow Keith to continue working on
    Mesa full time for some time to come.

    For more information about Mesa see www.mesa3d.org. For more
    information about id Software, Inc. see www.idsoftware.com.

    --------------------------------

    This donation from John/id is very generous. Keith and I are very
    grateful.
    And many people knows that Mesa is well tested and plays well but only on those engines, others are some kind of rough edge scenario .
    Last edited by dungeon; 05-18-2014, 09:18 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      I and Tesseract dev thinking roughly the same

      Mesa seems to have a bunch of weird inexplicable crashes in the driver with anything except newer Intel hardware. I don't think most of the paths in Mesa beyond what essentially Quake engines would use have been exercised much...

      The fact that it was trying to compile the largest shader in the game at the time of the crash is rather suspicious.
      http://tesseract.gg/forum/viewtopic.php?id=46

      Comment


      • #18
        In a way, who cares? Almost nobody is gaming on Windows using opengl. It would be interesting to compare d3d games that have opengl linux counterparts. I bet linux would come up short.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by bridgman View Post
          Whoops, you're right. Didn't mean to reverse the words. That said, I don't like either phrase

          I would translate "not largely shared" to something less than 50% (say 40-45) and "largely not shared" to something much less, maybe 20-25%. AFAIK the code sharing is still over 50%, although certainly lower than it used to be before MS moved the graphics memory manager and related code from the driver to the OS starting with Vista.
          We both translate it differently, but thats what happens with vague terms like 'largely'... not mentioning word order .

          Still over 50% sounds pretty good, although I was hoping on a higher percentage. Any possibilities or plans increase this further, especialy now opengl is getting more important for crossplatform develop and game engines targeting this posibility?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by molecule-eye View Post
            In a way, who cares? Almost nobody is gaming on Windows using opengl. It would be interesting to compare d3d games that have opengl linux counterparts. I bet linux would come up short.
            I expect opengl getting increasing important, especially for crossplatform and mobile development. Besides supporting two layers in a game engine, there's also the testing aspect. Its a lot of work to test crosplatform software, especially considering they have to test it for each gpu manufacturer and each gpu for opengl and directx, both having their own problems. For simpler games I wouldn't be surprised if a developer would choose to only support opengl if he's targetting crossplatform. Testing and debugging is expensive.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by molecule-eye View Post
              In a way, who cares? Almost nobody is gaming on Windows using opengl. It would be interesting to compare d3d games that have opengl linux counterparts. I bet linux would come up short.
              It would then make the benchmarks inaccurate.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Calinou View Post
                It would then make the benchmarks inaccurate.
                No, it wouldn't. It would show what sort of performance you can expect on Windows vs what sort of performance you can expect on linux.

                I'm not saying these benchmarks are of no interest. It's nice to see how linux driver performrance compares to windows driver performance. But I'm more interested in seeing how Windows performance more generally compares against linux performance.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by molecule-eye View Post
                  No, it wouldn't. It would show what sort of performance you can expect on Windows vs what sort of performance you can expect on linux.

                  I'm not saying these benchmarks are of no interest. It's nice to see how linux driver performrance compares to windows driver performance. But I'm more interested in seeing how Windows performance more generally compares against linux performance.
                  Linux driver performance vs Windows driver performance? That's an easy one. On Linux, glxgears runs at 300 FPS. On Windows, Dota 2 runs at 40 FPS. Clearly the Linux driver is more performant.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Ancurio View Post
                    Linux driver performance vs Windows driver performance? That's an easy one. On Linux, glxgears runs at 300 FPS. On Windows, Dota 2 runs at 40 FPS. Clearly the Linux driver is more performant.
                    That sounds right. It's not even relative to the card used. Just any AMD card gives those numbers. Amazing, really.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X