No announcement yet.

ATI: Linux vs. Windows Vista

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ATI: Linux vs. Windows Vista

    Phoronix: ATI: Linux vs. Windows Vista

    Since AMD introduced their new Linux display driver last month, we have published a number of different articles looking at the Radeon performance across their different GPU product generations. This ATI/AMD Linux driver testing and exploration continued this month with the release of the 8.42 driver, which finally introduced AIGLX support for the fglrx driver. One area though we haven't yet analyzed is how their official Linux driver now compares to their much-optimized Windows Catalyst driver. Today, however, we will be looking just at that as we compare the ATI Radeon HD 2900XT 512MB performance under Linux and Microsoft Windows Vista.

  • #2
    I must be dreaming.. This can't be true...


    • #3
      A bit more details in the test would have been good, like what version of DirectX was running on Vista if 10 then I guess the game looked better on vista than on linux which comes at a cost of fps's. Dont want to come off as some windows fanboy but usually these kind of tests dont tend to hold up when examined with microscopes....but yes I thought I was dreaming too


      • #4
        That huge performance difference in ET:QW may be caused by a faulty linux driver.

        Performance in X? - The Threat increased greatly between 8.40 and 8.42 on my system, but now particles from engine jets render as white billboards (before, particles were the main cause of slowdowns).
        Also, I get an interlaced screen when I run it at 1280x1024.

        Who knows what other things fglrx doesn't do, which results in increased performance/decreased visual quality.

        But then again, 8.42 still seems geared towards r600, and I have an r500 (x1950pro) ...


        • #5
          As pessimistic as I'd love to be, I'm not going to be as pessimistic.

          ...white billboards, LOL. If those were real, you could use your exhaust as weaponry

          Anyways, at this point I wouldn't say that they're "cheating", but just that they still need many more releases to improve and fix current (and future bugs). We do know they're on a new code base, so it is possible that it's a problem with a driver, not an intentional cheat.

          ...but time will tell.
          [In any case, I'm happy to see Linux pwning Vista. Thanks, that's all from me]


          • #6
            I'd really like to seen screen by screen comparisons of the same sittings to verify that everything looks exactly the same. As amazing as the results are, I don't think I'll buy just yet...

            I don't know much about this game, but to keep the results fair, both instances of the game should have been using OpenGL. Although performance between D3D and OpenGL is in theory very similar, it really depends on the machine the two are running.
            Last edited by Morlyn; 10-30-2007, 02:31 PM.


            • #7
              There's probably some missing rendering operations going on there. In theory, the codebase is mostly the same (if you buy their PR...), so any differences will be due to better fits with one or the other- or missing functionality.


              • #8
                Looking at the fps numbers, I'd say that rendering of ET:QW on Windows was synchronized to screen refresh (60 Hz), while on Linux that was not the case (is OpenGL vsync even supported in these drivers?). Make sure vsync is not enabled in Windows drivers or game settings and test again, please.

                If vsync issues and other potential rendering problems are ruled out, the results seem very impressive indeed.
                Last edited by deneb; 10-30-2007, 02:52 PM.


                • #9
                  the results are pretty impressive.
                  though, i'm not really surprised. the enemy territory for what i've read around is based on a new engine that isn't optimized specifically for dx10, since they're limited to vista and there are still a lot of xp users that in that case wouldn't be able to play it. since the engine is new and studied to express the full potential of a graphic board it would interesting a benchmark of the same game and settings with the new nvidia driver under linux and windows and a confrontation between the 2 leading graphic producers. i'm prepared to bet a little sum on the nvidia linux driver also beating the vista one.
                  remember that vista is still a fresh system of microsoft and as that it's still in its beta test phase. only after the first sp maybe it will be a good one.

                  now, let's return to the bench themselves:
                  are there texture errors or tearing during normal use of the system with the new ati drivers?! if you didn't experienced issues, may this be caused by fact that the last releases of the driver are optimized to work with the r600 series?! this could really be a reason why the new driver performs so well with the hd board.
                  and as a test, it would be nice if an amd64 or ia64 version could be tested, since the number of linux users using a 64bit version distro is quite high. how do these games perform with a 64bit version distro?


                  • #10
                    VSYNC endabled on my system XP/Linux, dont lock to framerate, I CAN COMFIRN THE PERFORMANCE, NO SHITTY graphics on my 2900 XT.

                    Things goes faster running under linux. its soo true. i wrote topic or post about it, with not real evidence.

                    here was it. the one who got the particel thing fucked had 1950 PRO so the 2900 XT should be correct, btw got demo, might be that i dont see the particles at all, who knows, i havnt seen the game without yet, and dont got money to buy the damn game before 11TH.
                    performance wise is the 2900 XT good, but at a price for u US. guys, and prolly powerusage. WAIT FOR hd3XXX
                    ima gonna buy 4x hd3xxx if they come cheap =). hope CF and OC options are avaible in linux soon aswell