Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SteamOS vs. Windows 8.1 NVIDIA Performance

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

  • #16
    What will be interesting to see (some day) are the Direct3D vs. OpenGL benchmarks. Since, in practice, Windows gamers and developers are using Direct3D.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by johnc View Post
      What will be interesting to see (some day) are the Direct3D vs. OpenGL benchmarks. Since, in practice, Windows gamers and developers are using Direct3D.
      Yes, we need comparison against Direc3D because that's the default for Windows. And I guess the actual difference in performance is even more in favor of Windows if you consider the fact that Direct3D is faster then OpenGL in most cases. Let's see how much can Valve help in improving OpenGL performance on Linux.
      http://www.g-truc.net/post-0547.html

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by sarmad View Post
        Yes, we need comparison against Direc3D because that's the default for Windows. And I guess the actual difference in performance is even more in favor of Windows if you consider the fact that Direct3D is faster then OpenGL in most cases. Let's see how much can Valve help in improving OpenGL performance on Linux.
        http://www.g-truc.net/post-0547.html
        correct me if i'm wrong, but unigine benchmarks all support directx.
        http://unigine.com/products/heaven/

        Comment


        • #19
          Didn't expect this performance on an RT kernel, although never tested an rt kernel myself. Wil install steamos this weekend, curious how the game play 'feels'.

          Since its based on debian, its save to asume they wil go for wayland when its ready *ducks and runs*

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by justmy2cents View Post
            correct me if i'm wrong, but unigine benchmarks all support directx.
            http://unigine.com/products/heaven/
            Yes, Unigine supports DirectX but I don't think it was using it in the results of this article. I think this article's test was using OpenGL on both SteamOS and Windows.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by sarmad View Post
              Yes, we need comparison against Direc3D because that's the default for Windows. And I guess the actual difference in performance is even more in favor of Windows if you consider the fact that Direct3D is faster then OpenGL in most cases. Let's see how much can Valve help in improving OpenGL performance on Linux.
              http://www.g-truc.net/post-0547.html
              don't know if it is just conspiracy theorist in me, but that paper was contradicting it self on all fronts like he wrote it half drunk and forgot what he wrote in previous sentence. just to name a few
              - directx coders know how to code, opengl... NOT (translation, if it is a car and red it is a sports car, if it is blue it is a truck)
              - all coders more optimize directx implementation, then says valve obviously didn't (how so?)
              - claims valve coded for dx9 and then graphs show almost same results for 9 and 11
              - coders optimize for dx11 rather than 9 (leaving me wondering if everything till 11 was a pile of crap)

              but, the claim where my alarm went ballistic was this
              "If we really want better OpenGL drivers, what we need is programmers that write better OpenGL programs."
              huh????? based that they wrote their benchmarks for OpenGL.... it leads to
              - benchmarks they provide are complete crap as there are no coders that would know how to code, god forbid optimize OpenGL
              - they are sole coders on this planet that know how to use OpenGL efficiently
              - wondering as last time i checked ps3 and ps4 for example don't have DirectX and since there is no coder who'd optimize all games for those run at 70%

              and i'm no linux'be'all evangelist. if it doesn't suit somewhere, it doesn't, if directx is better, why not. why would i care? i don't use windows from personal belief and i wouldn't even if they strapped 3 hookers on my win box for the same price as OEM.

              still, reading that was triggering same bullshit alarm as reading MS published reasoning why Server 2003 over linux. and then you look at hardware they used... absolute worst from NEVER, EVER use that in linux, where winner was Raid controller which worked at best 5MB/sec in linux. was really funny looking at results they got there/ i wonder how much network traffic was. maybe, 5MB?

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by justmy2cents View Post
                don't know if it is just conspiracy theorist in me, but that paper was contradicting it self on all fronts like he wrote it half drunk and forgot what he wrote in previous sentence. just to name a few
                - directx coders know how to code, opengl... NOT (translation, if it is a car and red it is a sports car, if it is blue it is a truck)
                - all coders more optimize directx implementation, then says valve obviously didn't (how so?)
                - claims valve coded for dx9 and then graphs show almost same results for 9 and 11
                - coders optimize for dx11 rather than 9 (leaving me wondering if everything till 11 was a pile of crap)

                but, the claim where my alarm went ballistic was this
                "If we really want better OpenGL drivers, what we need is programmers that write better OpenGL programs."
                huh????? based that they wrote their benchmarks for OpenGL.... it leads to
                - benchmarks they provide are complete crap as there are no coders that would know how to code, god forbid optimize OpenGL
                - they are sole coders on this planet that know how to use OpenGL efficiently
                - wondering as last time i checked ps3 and ps4 for example don't have DirectX and since there is no coder who'd optimize all games for those run at 70%

                and i'm no linux'be'all evangelist. if it doesn't suit somewhere, it doesn't, if directx is better, why not. why would i care? i don't use windows from personal belief and i wouldn't even if they strapped 3 hookers on my win box for the same price as OEM.

                still, reading that was triggering same bullshit alarm as reading MS published reasoning why Server 2003 over linux. and then you look at hardware they used... absolute worst from NEVER, EVER use that in linux, where winner was Raid controller which worked at best 5MB/sec in linux. was really funny looking at results they got there/ i wonder how much network traffic was. maybe, 5MB?
                You wouldn't fuck 'em becuse you dont know what to do with them =D

                If I get this correctly, you just said you 'dont care/what do I care what is used', then you used a euphemism stating you wouldn't use Windows with strap-on hookers.

                Othwerwise, I think I'm lost in translation =D Yeah, go for that. I jsut like the idea of strap-on hookers threefold.


                On an even lighter note, YAYYYY SteamOS. You can go away thinking yet another person, Michael, realises the point of this article!

                Comment


                • #23
                  yea, i don't care and i wouldn't use win. nor osx. i stand at what i said.

                  but, the fact that i wouldn't use windows never posed slightest trouble to suggest those 2 when i felt they will do the needed job best and fastest. more than few times i suggested windows server infrastructure and redirected as i knew their environment was too dependant on some strictly windows services which might pose trouble later if they were not compatible in planning.
                  hell, i even code software for windows on linux and i have no hard feelings. all i do is code so cross platform i never need windows in order to be sure it will work 100%.

                  what would be strange here?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I don't get what's happening in the first two graphs. The latency graph clearly shows that Windows has much less latency on all cards, and it's not just the spikes. But then the bar chart shows Windows has lower FPS than SteamOS. That looks contradictory to me...

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      windows has higher latency!

                      did you misinterpret it?
                      the y-axis says "less is better"
                      and what you can see is that steamos has the lower latency comparing same cards. It is however quite hard to read because the colors overlap so much. But look again, on most points you can see that steamos is slightly lower==ahead of windows. Also the spikes are bad and they seem to be there only for windows - assuming that there are no steamos spikes exactly hiding behind the windows ones.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        directx?

                        and yes - it was all tested in opengl 4.4, as clearly stated in the box on the first page of the benchmark. And yes, a directx comparison would be interesting!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by tomtomme View Post
                          did you misinterpret it?
                          the y-axis says "less is better"
                          and what you can see is that steamos has the lower latency comparing same cards. It is however quite hard to read because the colors overlap so much. But look again, on most points you can see that steamos is slightly lower==ahead of windows. Also the spikes are bad and they seem to be there only for windows - assuming that there are no steamos spikes exactly hiding behind the windows ones.
                          Oh, OK. I thought one orange was the other orange, and there not being any purple anywhere also makes ir more confusing.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            purple

                            you can see some purple. it is the lowest color, right below the red. you should check your monitors color or zoom in a bit

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I meant at first glance. Sure, you can see the few fragments of purple at the bottom of the red line if you try, but it's not exactly obvious it's there when you look at it for the first time.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by kwahoo View Post
                                Windows games has not such benchmarks too. All we need is a simple program controlling X command and recording FPS-number. If you can record and playback X input (keyboard, mouse etc.) devices, you can create a reproducible benchmark. Time to fork xnee...
                                Playing back X input is not reproducible, because games have randomness. The enemies might behave differently, and so on, causing a different graphics load.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X