No announcement yet.

Intel Broadwell Iris Pro Graphics: Windows 10 vs. Linux

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by Linuxxx View Post
    I find it interesting that no one (including Michael) seems to notice how much smoother Linux was in the OpenArena test when looking at the frame-latency!
    Just like the result one gets when comparing to OSX, too!

    It would be interesting to do the same frame-latency test with Arch Linux, since I would expect the latency to be WORSE there, with them using a (soft) real-time kernel by default...
    (Yes, in case you Archers didn't notice: You are running a real-time kernel by default, which means worse multi-threaded & gaming performance by DEFAULT!)
    [Type in 'uname -a' and look for "PREEMPT", which means that the Linux kernel itself becomes preemptible, which is generally not a good thing...]

    I used to mention that as well.
    So, it looks like the triangle test is what's lagging now since the rest of gpumark shows i915 equal or better than w10. I wonder why that is since the other subtests are so good (well, at least the ones that run).
    Last edited by liam; 30 July 2015, 09:54 PM.


    • #22
      Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post

      That's a pretty ridiculous argument to make, given the different levels of GL support between the Windows and Linux drivers.

      If a 30% perf slowdown (or whatever fury had) is a disaster, how is not even running anything requiring GL4+ not considered a disaster? At least Fury can actually run the games, even if it's slower than expected. Half the hardware on the iGPU is unusable because the driver doesn't support it.
      That's disingenuous. You know just as well as I do that GL4.2 is right around the corner.


      • #23
        Originally posted by duby229 View Post

        That's disingenuous. You know just as well as I do that GL4.2 is right around the corner.
        Not for Intel I don't.

        We don't know when it will actually happen, but having 4.3 support in the december release is probably the most optimistic goal. It could easily slip to March. And it's been that way for years, this isn't some temporary condition.
        Last edited by smitty3268; 30 July 2015, 10:34 PM.


        • #24
          I think Intel has a bit more focus on OpenGL ES 3.1 as this would be needed for a fully open source Android 5+ port. This would give em a better position in the mobile world. They sell PowerVR based Atoms too, but getting rid of binary blobs is always nice. OpenGL 4 is certainly a goal to reach as well - those Broadwell/Skylake chips with L4 cache will definitely kill midrage AMD/Nvidia extra chips from new (mainly mobile) systems. Desktop users will still add a dedicated card for games, therefore see this CPU more as technology demonstration.


          • #25
            Time ago I did read MS WOS drops frames and it is hard to benchmark vs not dropping frames at GNU/Linux. Does some test detect if MS WOS 10 also drop frames to trick the benchmarks? Said that I am more interested in reading a benchmark vs MS WOS 10 for AAA titles as the last you benchmarked, without any MS WOS 10 result, and last but not least Arch/Manjaro preemtive kernels are really worse than ubuntu nor rt ones for gaming?