Intel Broadwell Iris Pro Graphics: Windows 10 vs. Linux

[duby229]

I guess selection of the games are those that people actually playing It is slower then Windows 10 on release, that will likely never be fixed for Broadwell... let alone that this is 3 months long paper launch product And that you can buy CPU+GPU for $200 less with better GPU performance, and so on...

In your wording Micheal this is not just disaster, this article is utter disaster - even if you "unintentionally" missed to say so.

That's not fair. This APU is performing on linux roughly how it's supposed to, but the Fury card isn't.

[duby229]

Windows: Can reasonably run a desktop environment
Linux: Can reasonably run a desktop environment.

Comparison done, that is all iGPU is meant for, even if for some reason they try to put ressources into it.

So wrong, so, so wrong.

How many times does Intel have release GPU's that can't run composited desktops comfortably before people finally lose that attitude? It's a good thing this GPU is as fast as it is. It finally sets a reasonable minimum bar. I bet you were one of those people that always said 1ghz is fast enough for CPUs or that 6.4GB is big enough for HDDs or 640KB of ram is enough for anybody....

[Michael]

What about something a tad more recent, like e.g. Counter Strike Global Offensive, Metro Last Light, Dying Light, SM civ V, BioShock Infinite, etc. etc. etc.

That's already been explained multiple times, including on this very thread.

[dungeon]

That's not fair.

It was also not fair when USA/GB decided to bombard my country where i born, and no one asking me thing about that. Doesn't matter, i just returned there join the army and shot on NATO airplanes for about 2 months.

As you see it does not matter, did i like something or not. I don't even wanted all that to happen, but that is how war works.

Bad things starts with bad wording

[schmidtbag]

I think these results are pretty good. Linux isn't too far behind. I have a feeling that once mesa is up-to-spec, intel can focus more on performance.

[Linuxxx]

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...]

[Gps4l]

Remind me what's the point of comparing ages old games? Or why would anyone care about 150+ FPS difference.

What about something a tad more recent, like e.g. Counter Strike Global Offensive, Metro Last Light, Dying Light, SM civ V, BioShock Infinite, etc. etc. etc.

I agree fro some part, but how many gamers will not have a video card in their pc ?

The thing I like to see, mostly because of this: http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/linux/faster-zombies/

Is how the propertary driver on Linux go vs the propertairy on windows(10)

[dragorth]

I am not up to speed on OpenGL. If the O.S. driver exposes more OpenGL 4.x features, like I hear are almost ready to roll, would the game pick those up and hopefully improve the benchmark runs? It would be interesting to know what is due to the lack of OpenGL 4.x features, and what is due to implementation differences. What is it that is giving Windows that 10% edge?

The way OpenGL 3.3 works, if the feature is available and exposed, then the game can use it. So, in this case, it would be able to pick up the pieces that aren't implemented, but if the game doesn't already support it, then it doesn't matter. If the game does, and just didn't use it do to no driver support, then it will start using it.

[smitty3268]

That's not fair. This APU is performing on linux roughly how it's supposed to, but the Fury card isn't.

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.

[AJenbo]

Made now just $50 in tips for Windows 10 testing

Make that 55$ :P