Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is Windows 7 Actually Faster Than Ubuntu 10.04?

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

  • Originally posted by YAFU View Post
    Hello.
    Can you tell me how Phoronix gets the Hardware to perform the tests? Has the Hardware been donated by an organization or company? What organization or company?
    Thank you.
    Pretty sure it's a mix and match. Some AIB's send their wares to but I believe most of the product is paid for out of pocket.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
      You are mixing up API functionality with API design. Please don't, they are not the same thing: OpenGL 3.3/4.0 is modern in functionality but legacy-ridden in design. The original OpenGL 3.0 proposal would have fixed both issues in one go but the design was scrapped as too ambitious. The resulting spec only fixed 50% of the issue (functionality), leaving the broken design intact.

      Why is the design broken?....
      My first post! Maybe my last!

      Having just started to have a go at learning OpenGL I found your comment of useful interest. You state that the design is 'broken'. Design is the 'how'; the how of a specification. I have read recent the OpenGL specs but find it not much more than API functionality spec. It is hard to gain an understanding of the overall process desired. Threading is hardly mentioned in the glspec32.core spec.

      So, do you think that the design is 'broken|old' because the specs are also in need of updating to reflect modern GPUs and CPUs: multi-processors and threaded software techniques?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Vanir View Post
        My first post! Maybe my last!

        Having just started to have a go at learning OpenGL I found your comment of useful interest. You state that the design is 'broken'. Design is the 'how'; the how of a specification. I have read recent the OpenGL specs but find it not much more than API functionality spec. It is hard to gain an understanding of the overall process desired. Threading is hardly mentioned in the glspec32.core spec.

        So, do you think that the design is 'broken|old' because the specs are also in need of updating to reflect modern GPUs and CPUs: multi-processors and threaded software techniques?
        I think the spec somewhere mentions that it very consciously doesn't specify how it should be implemented. That's entirely up to the hardware manufacturers. The spec can only make sure that it doesn't get in the way of a particular implementation.

        Comment


        • I see all this flame about DX, OpenGL, etc, and I see nothing about the real conclusion you're all omitting: if one can reasonably play games with Ubuntu, maybe better with other Linux distros, why then should anyone pay for a Windows license at all?

          Maybe because some titles haven't made into Linux yet? Because some people believe that paying for Windows and those extra FPS are worth? Who knows?

          My point is that the article proves that Linux is competently able to handle games, as long as you **don't** have an Intel IGP. Period. Want more details? More benchmarks? More options enables/disabled? Fine. But I believe that more benchmarks certainly will not change the conclusion of the article. At least, that's my opinion.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Caveira View Post
            My point is that the article proves that Linux is competently able to handle games, as long as you **don't** have an Intel IGP.
            Not sure how you can draw a line like that when there are failures to even run the applications on certain setups, not to mention tests were done with their closed source drivers. Other facets of gaming have to be considered as well such as audio.

            Yes under ideal circumstances and hardware configurations linux can keep up to windows in gaming and those circumstances depend heavily on outside 3d party closed source support. We still however do not have a good X vs Y comparison because not all in real life usage capabilities and functions were explored.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by deanjo View Post
              Yes under ideal circumstances and hardware configurations linux can keep up to windows in gaming and those circumstances depend heavily on outside 3d party closed source support.
              Ideal circumstances? You make it sound as if Linux needs some extraordinary combination to be able to play games while with any recent VGA (except Intel) offers that capability.

              Comment


              • I think a more appropriate title for this article is, "Is Michael Actually Becoming a Microsoft Fanboy?"

                I don't see anyone providing benchmarks for Ubuntu OR Linux on BBSs decidated to Windows. Why? Because no one cares (they're using Windows and THAT'S why they're are there). For me as someone who uses Linux and is therefore here, to read LINUX-related stuff, I don't give a rat's ass about any comparisons to Windows. The fact you use your allegedly limited (as you care to mention every day) resources for this sort of crap actually makes me rethink if I should make any donations or continue to visit this site.

                And always those populistic titles... seriously, the level of journalism here is starting to really get on my nerves.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Apopas View Post
                  Ideal circumstances? You make it sound as if Linux needs some extraordinary combination to be able to play games while with any recent VGA (except Intel) offers that capability.
                  Really because if you read the review, there are issues with do not runs, some large gaps in performance with certain hardware combination, anomalies with resolution settings and so forth. The only real issue with the windows runs was with the most expensive card in the comparison refused to launch one of the tests. Also keep in mind that was done with drivers that bypass much of X.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by susikala View Post
                    I think a more appropriate title for this article is, "Is Michael Actually Becoming a Microsoft Fanboy?"

                    I don't see anyone providing benchmarks for Ubuntu OR Linux on BBSs decidated to Windows. Why? Because no one cares (they're using Windows and THAT'S why they're are there). For me as someone who uses Linux and is therefore here, to read LINUX-related stuff, I don't give a rat's ass about any comparisons to Windows. The fact you use your allegedly limited (as you care to mention every day) resources for this sort of crap actually makes me rethink if I should make any donations or continue to visit this site.

                    And always those populistic titles... seriously, the level of journalism here is starting to really get on my nerves.
                    To get better at ones weaknesses, one has to look at the competition in comparison to identify and have a yardstick to measure by. Doesn't matter if it bruises a persons "fanboyisms". More harm is done by ignoring the weaknesses.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by susikala View Post
                      I think a more appropriate title for this article is, "Is Michael Actually Becoming a Microsoft Fanboy?"

                      I don't see anyone providing benchmarks for Ubuntu OR Linux on BBSs decidated to Windows. Why? Because no one cares (they're using Windows and THAT'S why they're are there). For me as someone who uses Linux and is therefore here, to read LINUX-related stuff, I don't give a rat's ass about any comparisons to Windows. The fact you use your allegedly limited (as you care to mention every day) resources for this sort of crap actually makes me rethink if I should make any donations or continue to visit this site.

                      And always those populistic titles... seriously, the level of journalism here is starting to really get on my nerves.
                      Calm down dude, relax! It's just an article...

                      I also use/develop Linux for 8 yrs or so, but the article isn't useless as you say. Unfortunately, PC gaming industry focus on Windows. Seeing the rise of Linux in this area is awesome, and the comparison to Windows is therefore obvious.

                      If you don't care about **gaming**, this article isn't really of great use for you. Clearly, the intention was never to advertise Windows - as a matter of fact, showing that Linux is there for gaming actually is a warning to Microsoft.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Vanir View Post
                        My first post! Maybe my last!

                        Having just started to have a go at learning OpenGL I found your comment of useful interest. You state that the design is 'broken'. Design is the 'how'; the how of a specification. I have read recent the OpenGL specs but find it not much more than API functionality spec. It is hard to gain an understanding of the overall process desired. Threading is hardly mentioned in the glspec32.core spec.

                        So, do you think that the design is 'broken|old' because the specs are also in need of updating to reflect modern GPUs and CPUs: multi-processors and threaded software techniques?
                        Not really. You are talking about the implementation, while I was talking about API design. API design refers to the gl* functions and how they are supposed to be used; implementation is how these gl* functions are implemented in the drivers.

                        A different API design might make threading more simpler or more efficient to implement but is not a prerequisite. Right now, you can create multiple OpenGL contexts and use them in parallel to load resources (for example). Some drivers might perform better or worse when used like that but this is mostly an implementation detail.

                        My point is that the weak point of OpenGL is the "backwards compatibility at all costs" approach. Yes, there are good reasons why the ARB did this, but I cannot help but point out that Microsoft didn't maintain compatibility for Direct3D and this helped them immensely in the end. They were able to learn from their previous iterations and managed to design a modern API that is cleaner, more efficient and simpler to implement than OpenGL.

                        Personally, I use OpenGL extensively but only because it's cross-platform. Were I able to use Direct3D in the same manner (and if D3D gained a couple of capabilities it is missing right now - e.g. 3d stereo), I would switch in an instant.

                        Still, there is hope: the ARB has suddenly become much more agile and has started listening to and implementing suggestions by developers other than Carmack. Functionality-wise, we are pretty much covered right now (we just need Intel and Apple to get off their asses and release 3.x drivers). What's left is an API cleanup that will allow developers to stop tearing their hair out when dropping down to raw OpenGL.

                        Comment


                        • Just my two cents...

                          Approximately two months before W7 was released, I was hardly using anything but my slowest machine, which is a Prescott (3.0, HT), with an onboard i915. I made it a sport to get the most out of it in terms of scheduling and most important, GFX performance.

                          What I want to point out is, that I had never expected the performance I had from that terribly low-end chipset.

                          At that time, I didn't use Gallium. The project was starting, but not at all usable. However, that was about the time that Jessy Barnes, Eric Anholt, Dave Airlied and Kristian Högsberg (in no particular order) were very busy at improving the DRM code.

                          They did some incredible work ..

                          Windows Vista/7/ .. wouldn't even allow me to turn on "Aero". After some experimenting however, I did get the i915 drivers running with hardware accelerated graphics.

                          Now here's the point; I had KDE (4.1 IIRC) running with _all_ compositing options turned _on_. Running as smooth as a baby's bottom. That is cube, rain, transparency, wobly (it worked, but who doesn't disable it as soon as it does.. )

                          Long story for a single remark ..

                          I don't understand why this test doesn't take any of the aforementioned facts into account. This is not at all a sneer/flame. I'd just like to know if I am the only one who had this experience (I can't imagine), or perhaps the writer just took games into account .. ? Especially because the writer is pointing at bad performance regarding Intel cards/chipsets.

                          Cheers,
                          Jan

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by susikala View Post
                            For me as someone who uses Linux and is therefore here, to read LINUX-related stuff, I don't give a rat's ass about any comparisons to Windows.
                            So don't read the article, then? You don't *have* to click the link, you know.

                            Leave this for those of us who can actually appreciate Michael's effort to provide hard data over, say, hand-waving and hearsay.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by jteb View Post
                              I don't understand why this test doesn't take any of the aforementioned facts into account. This is not at all a sneer/flame. I'd just like to know if I am the only one who had this experience (I can't imagine), or perhaps the writer just took games into account .. ? Especially because the writer is pointing at bad performance regarding Intel cards/chipsets.
                              Compositing performance is not relevant to 3d/gaming performance, they are two completely distinct issues. This article tests the latter.

                              As Michael said, more articles will follow soon.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                                So don't read the article, then? You don't *have* to click the link, you know.

                                Leave this for those of us who can actually appreciate Michael's effort to provide hard data over, say, hand-waving and hearsay.
                                Exactly, if someone wishes remain blind they can skip past the article and go forth in ignorance. That option is always there. It's not like going to the front page presents you with a browser window that can't be closed with the results of the tests.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X