Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NVIDIA GT 425M: Windows 7 Ultimate vs. Ubuntu 10.10

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
    A better definition of gaming platform would be any platform for which popular titles, in their full versions, are ported.

    Medal of Honor
    Starcraft 2
    Fallout: New Vegas
    FIFA Soccer 11
    Civilization V

    Which of those are available for Linux? AFAIK, none
    Crap... I bought a Nintendo DS thinking it was a gaming platform but it has none of those games!!
    I also have a Super Nintendo which has about 1000 games and I also thought it was a gaming platform, but it doesn't have any of those games either?? What the hell??!!
    Even DOS which I always thought of as a gaming platform doesn't have any game in that list... It seems to be really dificult to find a gaming platform these days.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by birdie View Post
      Another useless comparison.

      Linux is not a gaming platform.
      Would you care to elaborate on that? Under Linux I have 3D accelerated graphics, surround sound, ... my joystick is working, too.

      If you are talking about the lack of "blockbuster games" on Linux - that's not because "Linux is not a gaming platform".

      Comment


      • #18
        Thank you Phoronix for posting some actual numbers unlike most Linux fans who will just blatantly claim that Linux is faster.
        We have to face the truth. Windows has an advantage in 3D acceleration.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Yfrwlf View Post
          Where are the installers, because I haven't seen many and when I do find them they almost always have problems where I have to use the command line on them, something that should never have to be done anymore for Linux to be successful for desktop users.

          Secondly, where are the tie-ins to the software managers? If I install OilRush using the installer for it, will I be able to easily remove it via my distro's manager? I.e. I hope that's something that is standardized...

          As soon as software developers and companies don't have to make exceptions for specific distros in their software, THEN you'll be able to say that Linux fragmentation has been taken care of and that good standards have allowed successful interoperability.
          The "incompatible installer" myth...

          Makes you wonder how those small independent game developers manage it, to turn out Debian and RPM packages for their games.
          Even more amazing: They somehow manage it, that their games run on a plethora of distributions.

          Comment


          • #20
            OpenGL would not be much faster using Win with vsync enabled which usually looks better. As you usually don't need a anti-virus solution you save cpu/memory which makes the response time usually faster inside Linux when you start new apps. On a slow system this is more significant than on a fast one - it also depends on your a/v solution. For much more games you would need DX9 to 11 and this would be much slower using wine - even when you manage to run the game. So basically Linux will never be a full replacement os for gamers but for opengl it should be fast enough. When the test would have be done with ATI gfx and Unigine Heaven 2.1 up to 10.10 driver (without 10.10a hotfix) then the OpenGL results would be really low inside Win compared to DX11.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by devius View Post
              Crap... I bought a Nintendo DS thinking it was a gaming platform but it has none of those games!!
              I also have a Super Nintendo which has about 1000 games and I also thought it was a gaming platform, but it doesn't have any of those games either?? What the hell??!!
              Even DOS which I always thought of as a gaming platform doesn't have any game in that list... It seems to be really dificult to find a gaming platform these days.
              What part of "top titles" don't you get? What part of gamespot.com don't you get? What part of common sense don't you get?

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                What part of "top titles" don't you get? What part of gamespot.com don't you get? What part of common sense don't you get?
                What part of a sarcastic point about everyone not wanting to play the same games don't you get? Now calm down before you give yourself a coronary and kindly point out the linux ports of peggle and bejeweled.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Svartalf View Post
                  Heh... Hate to disillusion you there- but we're already at that threshold according to something Ballmer showed people this year. You can actually do the math yourself- but someone else has done it for you:

                  http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2010/09...he-1-myth.html

                  If you accept the figures that the industry pundits give on Netbooks, just for starters, the floor for shipped units using Linux (nobody will typically go out of their way to buy a Linux netbook and put Windows on it, sorry...) if you go off of the official shipped Netbook figures, is 6% of the total estimated market. That's the minimum and only using netbooks for a figure. The figure is quite a bit higher than that, obviously, because there's more than just netbooks out there.
                  Yeah, you could've actually done the math yourself, but someone else has done it for you:

                  debunking-the-myth-of-the-debunking-myth.html


                  Originally posted by Svartalf
                  there's some changes going on in the background that might change the story you're talking to.
                  OK. Back to where we were some months ago. I'd like you to be right, though.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                    What part of "top titles" don't you get? What part of gamespot.com don't you get? What part of common sense don't you get?
                    Ok... guess I need to be more clear and use sarcasm tags like everybody else. There's no need to be offended. Here's what I meant:

                    Just because a game YOU like or YOU want to play doesn't exist on a gaming platform that doesn't make it less of a gaming platform. It may not be a gaming platform YOU will want to game on, but that is it. Also, your argument of using gamespot as a reference to determine if something is a gaming platform doesn't make much sense. Why not use mobygames instead as it's a much bigger database and not commercially orientated? Oh wait, I know why! Because mobygames actually lists linux as a gaming platform, so that wouldn't be too beneficial to your argument.

                    If I got your argument correct, only the systems that show up on the main gamespot navigation bar are eligible as gaming platforms. And, of those only the ones that have the more popular and best selling titles (and long running franchises), like the ones you listed, so that leaves us with windows, PS3 and XBOX360 as the only gaming platforms that exist. That makes sense? The point is you can't use a commercial/promotional games site to figure out what is a gaming platform and what is not, because these sites benefit from promoting always the more recent (and profitable) games and game systems.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by yotambien View Post
                      Yeah, you could've actually done the math yourself, but someone else has done it for you:

                      debunking-the-myth-of-the-debunking-myth.html


                      OK. Back to where we were some months ago. I'd like you to be right, though.
                      Hmmm... Essentially there is no way of telling how much of Desktop/Laptop/Netbook systems are Linux... It seems it can be anything from 2% to 15%

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Michael, are you still benchmarking games with Compiz on? If you really want default settings, at least add results with Compiz off.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Quake 3 is the best FPS network game ever

                          Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                          Nothing new. Drivers are optimized for specific resolutions. In the past this was 1024x768. I suppose today it's higher.

                          Btw, no, gamers don't use low resolutions. You're still stuck in the MS-DOS days.

                          Also, Quake is hardly a reason for anyone to switch to Linux. Gamers want Fallout 3, F1 2010, the upcomming Dragon Age, etc, etc, not Quake Live that's just the ancient Quake 3 Arena but in a browser.

                          Quake 3 and Quake Live is the best FPS to play network battles ever made, there are also who like more the Half Live Counter Strike.

                          One thing is to prove new games, or play solo, but for battle Quakers there are a lot, see the growinng user numbers of Quake Live. i have been in Quake contests, and in ciberparties and still is the main battle game, no succes fir q4 in this field.

                          Obviously people do not change in one day, but this quake champions play with minimal configs and minimal resolution because is faster, even in network. The best IP stack in Linux and if it is, the best results at lower resolutions I assure you would make this guys to put a minimal Linux with firefox and Quakelive if they can make a littel more frags because this advantage, In competition every little advantege is a lot.

                          And they are liders of a big community, where some thousends would change to a dual configuration if it is worth,

                          Of course nobody would migrate or dual config for MS WOX 7 specific games,

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by unimatrix View Post
                            Thank you Phoronix for posting some actual numbers unlike most Linux fans who will just blatantly claim that Linux is faster.
                            We have to face the truth. Windows has an advantage in 3D acceleration.
                            1. For the 100,000'th time. Ubuntu != Linux. You can see major performance different between distributions even if you're using the nVidia binary blob (E.g: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...buntu910&num=2).

                            2. Given the fact that Phoronix is using Ubuntu in its stock configuration, it's entirely possible that Ubuntu's default configuration is ill-suited to run games.

                            Just to put things in perspective, on my Fedora 13 workstation I use a hand-written script to start games. Among other things, this script disables BOINC and kwin composition. Last time I bothered to check, using this script both UT2K4 and Doom3 showed a 10-30% performance increase at -very- high resolutions (Dell U2711).
                            Now, you may claim that kwin should have automatically disabled composition once I start a full-screen OpenGL application (Much like Windows Vista/7), but given the fact that a composing window manager is not a prerequisite for playing games (Windows XP anyone?), a well-optimized distribution should be able to give Windows a run for its money if not suppress it (But given Phoronix' reluctance to pit any other distribution besides Ubuntu against MAC/W7, we will never know...)

                            - Gilboa
                            DEV: Intel S2600C0, 2xE52658V2, 32GB, 4x2TB + 2x3TB, GTX780, F21/x86_64, Dell U2711.
                            SRV: Intel S5520SC, 2xX5680, 36GB, 4x2TB, GTX550, F21/x86_64, Dell U2412..
                            BACK: Tyan Tempest i5400XT, 2xE5335, 8GB, 3x1.5TB, 9800GTX, F21/x86-64.
                            LAP: ASUS N56VJ, i7-3630QM, 16GB, 1TB, 635M, F21/x86_64.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by unimatrix View Post
                              Thank you Phoronix for posting some actual numbers unlike most Linux fans who will just blatantly claim that Linux is faster.
                              We have to face the truth. Windows has an advantage in 3D acceleration.
                              /me rollseyes and rofl's

                              Linux kernel overall boots faster, uses less resources, much more mod-friendly, requires less time to fuzz around, whole less trouble about security(including server case), its opensource, open license, no one forces to upgrade, you can choose to pay projects you want if you want, its constantly on a move, has everything to build projects of any scale including heavy games.

                              And when it slows down, its usually cause of lack of developer attention (way better than text editor capable of burning CDs) or/and closed sources.

                              Nvidia driver which does the majority of work, apart from loading levels, capturing keystrokes and playing sounds, is closed source. Maybe except well known case of low-res q3a benchmarks showing pure CPU efficiency. If you look up the test, linux is faster than windows there in terms of CPU.

                              AMD opensource driver is very feature/performance lacking, still AMD supports linux much more than nvidia. Strangely AMD refuses to create an option for people to tell they have bought their card to use with opensource drivers.

                              And then, microsoft can always steal from opensource. They did it, they do it, they will always do it. And throw mines in form of patents. They think they hinder linux. No, they arise hatred and hurt themself. At least there is GPL and not much BSD. And as for the code - the more attention it gets, the more polished it comes out.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by devius View Post
                                Ok... guess I need to be more clear and use sarcasm tags like everybody else. There's no need to be offended. Here's what I meant:

                                Just because a game YOU like or YOU want to play doesn't exist on a gaming platform that doesn't make it less of a gaming platform. It may not be a gaming platform YOU will want to game on, but that is it. Also, your argument of using gamespot as a reference to determine if something is a gaming platform doesn't make much sense. Why not use mobygames instead as it's a much bigger database and not commercially orientated? Oh wait, I know why! Because mobygames actually lists linux as a gaming platform, so that wouldn't be too beneficial to your argument.

                                If I got your argument correct, only the systems that show up on the main gamespot navigation bar are eligible as gaming platforms. And, of those only the ones that have the more popular and best selling titles (and long running franchises), like the ones you listed, so that leaves us with windows, PS3 and XBOX360 as the only gaming platforms that exist. That makes sense? The point is you can't use a commercial/promotional games site to figure out what is a gaming platform and what is not, because these sites benefit from promoting always the more recent (and profitable) games and game systems.
                                These sites exist to make money. And money is made by covering popular games (those that sell best). In other words, games the majority of "gamers" want.

                                Yes, 10-year old A-titles, games by smaller indie studios or individuals do qualify as games. But most gamers want the new, big, expensive productions. Those who cost millions of dollars to produce. That doesn't mean they don't play smaller titles; it just means they can live without the small titles, but not without the A-titles. And not vice versa.

                                With all that in mind, what is a "gaming platform" and what is not is defined by the gaming industry: a gaming platform is whatever platform the gaming industry chooses to port their titles to now, or did so in the past. Old gaming platforms would include MS-DOS, Sega Mega Drive, etc. Current gaming platforms would include Windows, PS3, XBOX 360.

                                Even the Mac, with its bigger market share compared to Linux, is not a gaming platform; only a tiny fraction of A-titles get ported.

                                If you want to tell yourself that being able to play Quake, HoN and Tux Racer makes Linux a gaming platform, then that's your right. Me, I go with the views of those who actually matter (since they have the money for big productions; writers, actors, etc.)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X