Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Big Graphics Card Comparison Of Metro Redux Games On Linux

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

  • Originally posted by MoonMoon View Post
    If you have to pay double the price for AMD, compared to Nvidia, to get similar framerates, is this still OK for you?
    Of course that is not OK for me. I *expect* that to change!

    I have been 15 years in this Free Software movement and what I have seen is constant change for good. It is very reasonable to think that things keep changing for good.

    I switched to GNU/Linux in the year 2000, from Windows 98. It was RedHat 6.2 derivate called IT-Linux, and it was way better than Windows 98, so much so that they were not even comparable


    Edit: Windows 98 was actually so nasty huge pile of crap that it makes me laugh out loud to think now how it was used everywhere, both by business and governments
    Last edited by moilami; 03-23-2015, 03:51 PM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by moilami View Post

      Edit: Windows 98 was actually so nasty huge pile of crap that it makes me laugh out loud to think now how it was used everywhere, both by business and governments
      Nah W98 was fine for gamers back then, you don't need Playstation 1 low res, you can play Oddworld all maxed out @ 640x480

      S3 Savage4 ruled the world
      Last edited by dungeon; 03-23-2015, 04:05 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by dungeon View Post
        Nah W98 was fine for gamers back then, you don't need Playstation 1 low res, you can play Oddworld all maxed out @ 640x480

        S3 Savage4 ruled the world
        Haha, W98 was not good even for gaming Blue Screen of Death's presence was everywhere It was also maybe the only OS in the world which slowly self-destructed itself There was that windows registry thing, which was such a mess over time, that it was better to make a clean reinstall of the whole OS

        But surely the most hilarious feature was "let windows search for new hardware", or how it was called. It was like a huge scam, W98 pretending to work very hard in trying to find new hardware. It made the computer appear to be almost like a steam machine because of all the helluva noise coming from disk drives, the monitor flashing at times randomly, and eventually the whole computer freezing for several minutes before giving a message "windows could not find any new hardware" DD These days it is almost hard to believe such totally hilarious crap existed

        Comment


        • Well it was best back then , becaase you don't have anything else it is easy to say it was a crap from this perspective of course .

          Comment


          • Originally posted by duby229 View Post
            You're the one making the high performance argument. In the same breath you say Intel performance doesn't matter but AMD performance does. You need to decide for your own self what of those two is actually true. They can't both be true.
            Actually they can both be true. Intel does integrated graphics that are not meant to compete with highend desktop graphics cards, they simply are not a serious competitor for highend gaming. But both Nvidia and AMD are competitors for highend gaming, at least on Windows. As these benchmarks show, currently there is only one brand that is actually able to deliver highend gaming to Linux, and that is Nvidia.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by duby229 View Post
              You can make up whatever numbers you want. Made up numbers are made up numbers.

              You've clearly never used catalyst or the AMD OSS drivers. It's obvious you don't know what you're talking about.
              I have owned AMD hardware in the past and I still own AMD hardware. I have used both drivers and still use the open source drivers on systems where performance doesn't matter. On systems were performance actually does matter (you know, not many people want to shell out 400 bucks to get the performance of a 200 bucks card) I have changed to Nvidia.
              Also, you may not have noticed, but you are discussing a Phoronix benchmark here. So your argument that the numbers in a different Phoronix benchmark are somehow for an unstated reason "made up", but this benchmark somehow for an unstated reason is not just shows that you are just here as living advertizing for AMD, not to have an actual discussion. Not that I expecte anything else from you, since you stated in a previous discussion that you never change a opinion once you have one established in your mind, which actually makes you unfit for any discussion.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by duby229 View Post
                I can't wait until mesa supports OGL4.2 at least. Then finally these arguments can be put fully to rest.
                You still fail to see that at current stage the OSS driver is slower that Catalyst in 3D performance, only in a few games it is slightly faster. So how does achieving OpenGL 4.2 compatibility change the performance issues of AMD cards again? And you tell other people that they don't know what they are talking about. Oh, the irony.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by MoonMoon View Post
                  You still fail to see that at current stage the OSS driver is slower that Catalyst in 3D performance, only in a few games it is slightly faster. So how does achieving OpenGL 4.2 compatibility change the performance issues of AMD cards again? And you tell other people that they don't know what they are talking about. Oh, the irony.
                  The more you speak the more you prove you don't know what you're saying.

                  The OSS driver is about 90% or more of Catalyst in 3d and WAAAAY faster in 2d. Plus it's stable and functional. Catalyst is so buggy it isn't even usable in most cases. The performance of OSS drivers are already close to par and well beyond par in most scenarios.

                  The only real critisism of the OSS drivers are the level of OpenGL support.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by MoonMoon View Post
                    Actually they can both be true. Intel does integrated graphics that are not meant to compete with highend desktop graphics cards, they simply are not a serious competitor for highend gaming. But both Nvidia and AMD are competitors for highend gaming, at least on Windows. As these benchmarks show, currently there is only one brand that is actually able to deliver highend gaming to Linux, and that is Nvidia.
                    So what you're saying is that -because- apples aren't oranges, they should taste like oranges? You make absolutely no sense.

                    The truth is the -only- Intel GPU that can run a desktop comfortably is the Iris Pro with integrated eDRAM. Lets look at the past here.... On Vista's launch Intel graphics couldn't run that desktop. On windows 8 launch Intel graphics couldn't run that desktop. On KDE4 release Intel graphics couldn't run that desktop. On Gnome3 release Intel graphics couldn't run that desktop. How many times does Intel have to prove that they don't care?

                    If any driver needs performance, It's Intels driver.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by duby229 View Post
                      The OSS driver is about 90% or more of Catalyst in 3d
                      Maybe in your wet dreams:
                      http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...opic_amd&num=1
                      http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ri_omega&num=1
                      http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...m3d_2014&num=1
                      http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...catalyst&num=1

                      Originally posted by duby229 View Post
                      and WAAAAY faster in 2d.
                      I wouldn't call it "WAAAAY faster" but at least it can beat Catalyst in some tests:
                      http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...en2d_win&num=1
                      http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...xorg-117&num=1
                      Last edited by Temar; 03-23-2015, 05:35 PM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X