Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 44

Thread: Gaming/Graphics Performance On Unity, GNOME, KDE, Xfce

  1. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    They already rooted out some excessive and obsolete stuff like Kubuntu.
    You could keep for yourself such bull. Kubuntu was Ubuntu killer, so they had to drop it. If Kubuntu was obsolete then everything was.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    79

    Default

    You need to test this with a more modern game... maybe Oilrush or Xonotic would be an option? As it is these benchmarks hardly reflect real life gaming performance unless you play these games with old tech.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,394

    Default

    Yea, KWin doesn't unredirect fullscreen windows at all by default, because it causes annoying screen corruption when combined with overlay windows (like the Amarok OSD). So while it should be considered a bug, it still explains the poor performance. To be fair, all tested games should have been run in windowed mode, in order to truly compare the compositing performance, and not the unredirection performance.

    Though at least for me, using latest Catalyst drivers with KWin causes screen blackening, so I have to keep it off regardless...

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    135

    Default

    you forgot the MATE desktop.
    but other than that quite expected results

  5. #25
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    Yea, KWin doesn't unredirect fullscreen windows at all by default, because it causes annoying screen corruption when combined with overlay windows (like the Amarok OSD). So while it should be considered a bug, it still explains the poor performance. To be fair, all tested games should have been run in windowed mode, in order to truly compare the compositing performance, and not the unredirection performance.

    Though at least for me, using latest Catalyst drivers with KWin causes screen blackening, so I have to keep it off regardless...
    http://blog.fishsoup.net/2011/06/13/...r-performance/

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    Unless the WM is doing something stupid, all of the non-compositing ones should have about the same performance.
    Indeed. I have no idea how Michael gets these results for uncomposited DE.

    Here's lightsmark on GTX 275/C2D E4500

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,394

    Default

    Thanks, that was a very interesting read!

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,712

    Default

    in a perfect world the window manager should have ZERO impact on gaming performance with a fullscreen 3d game.

    Which makes all results with the nvidia driver look VERY fishy. Something is not done right there.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    i was wondering the same thing. personally i like lxde (i'm using it right now) and i found it to be noticeably faster than xfce. i personally hate xfce, i'd rather use unity. back before the gnome 3 days, xfce was just about as heavy as gnome 2, but offered less features and yet it strived to be lightweight.
    I don't know what distro you use or how you obtained your Xfce setup, but Xfce's performance is regularly ruined by changes/additions made by distributions (like the mountain of sluggish fail that is Xubuntu).

    I ran openbox for years, then i ran fluxbox for years. I'm extremely minimalist and greatly value responsiveness from my desktop.

    These days I run Xfce, session managed and all, on ArchLinux and am happy with how it performs.

    How you can be a fan and user of LXDE but say something like "i'd rather use unity [than Xfce]" boggles my mind. But each to their own.


    <insert fanboyism here over Xfce trumping the competition in the benchmark results>

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    63

    Default Oil Rush performance

    I've tested performance of Oil Rush on my PC running Ubuntu 11.10 with different shells:

    AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4400+
    nVidia 9600 GT NVIDIA Driver Version:280.13
    2 GB RAM

    fulscreen 1920x1080, anti-aliasing off, graphics medium, textures high

    Enlightment E17 (with ecomporh enabled) from 39 to 60 fps (mostly 46-50 fps)
    Razor-qt from 37 to 60 fps (mostly 41-50 fps)

    Unity (using Daniel van Vugt PPA's for Compiz and Unity)
    Unity 2D
    Gnome Shell
    Gnome Classic (no effects)

    all four of them are locked at 30 fps (sometimes going to 28 fps)

    I've used built-in fps counter of the game and played on the same map always loading the same save.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •