No announcement yet.

Fedora 30 Wayland vs. X.Org Graphics Benchmarks On GNOME Shell

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
    Nothing in the video title, content or description shows and proofs that Xwayland is used.
    That is normal. Speed runners on their forums have been at times listing their desktop configuration this has included wayland setups. Yet they don't see any difference between running on wayland something or x11 something solution so that does not enter titles.

    Really in some ways this shows how close it currently is when its not a big enough different to write about in description.

    Yes the number of issues are reducing.


    • #22
      Originally posted by Hans Bull View Post
      Oh wow, Wayland, the perpetual beta (still without any notion of colour?) catching up, on a halfbaked "desktop" environment full of javascript bs. That's the 2019 Linux desktop.
      Not all compositors use javascript.
      By the way people get the colour thing wrong a lot. Wayland protocol from the start include the idea of colour correction. The thing they forgot was not a notion colour but calibration of colour where you need to turn off colour correction so you can calibrate.


      • #23
        Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
        "Wayland/XWayland performance is largely comparable to a traditional GNOME X.Org session."

        There is a performance hit with games and wrappers cause bugs. No wonder there is zero Xwayland gaming videos in YouTube.
        I'm playing on XWayland in FHD @120Hz for around 2 years now with a GTX 970 and I can play pretty much everything (around 2/3 of my Steam library). The most heavy game I have is GTA V, running via Steam Play, which plays around 40fps.

        I don't have any comparison with pure Xorg though, so I can't tell if they would run harder, better, faster, stronger. By the way, I'm using GNOME 3.


        • #24
          Originally posted by debianxfce View Post

          You are using X.
          Nope. Debian Sid, GNOME on Wayland, and recording with OBS-Studio which works fine for capturing xwayland surfaces, but doesn't work for native Wayland surfaces yet.

          You can even see the typical jitter issue that GNOME on Wayland has in the video if you know what to look for. It's quite obvious whenever the camera is panning. This is not a Wayland issue, but a GNOME on Wayland issue. There is no jitter when using Sway, although it has some issues of it's own, such as not being able to register a left mouse click while simultaneously holding down the right mouse button which makes many shooters unplayable.

          These are papercuts that will be fixed in due time. There is no reason why gaming on (x)Wayland can't be as good as pure X. Enough with the FUD debianxfce, it's getting tiresome.


          • #25
            Originally posted by debianxfce View Post

            You are using X. No title and description at all in the video, the video is private and comments are disabled.
            Of course they are using X, it's XWayland, XWayland is X. Why do you think what a person puts in their title and description is connected to what technologies they are using?


            • #26
              Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
              When there is wayland issues, who cares of wayland. Linux distributions are complex already and wayland is a feature that is not tested by game developers. Only true IBM believers game with a wayland desktop.
              LOL no I was not the one who started believing in Wayland desktop. Game players have.

              Yes Wayland has issues but who said X11 without wayland does not have issues.

              Yes those who play under gnome3 on wayland can spot the tell tail jitters in youtube videos. Next question why are people playing with gnome 3 wayland jitters. Hard reality is X11 without wayland dropping down to like 5 to 15 fps mins at times vs a sane 30+ min is way worse as it random and unpredictable..

              Yes those who don't play under gnome3 wayland think its normal X11 stalling just happening way to regularly.

              xwayland is X11 by the way. So game developers take the simple way out test for X11 and done.

              The reality most of the time with games you never play with drivers or configurations the game developer in fact used. So game developers testing or not testing under Wayland makes bugger all difference. The important question is are there gamers out there choosing Wayland desktops warts and all the answer is yes. Is choosing wayland desktops over a X11 desktops giving those gamers an experience they are liking the answer is yes. Could it be better than it currently is that is yes and if wayland desktops were working at best would they exceed best X11 ones it is yes again.

              If you want to look at cause of horrible stall in all things server running straight on hardware you have to look no more than the closed source Nvidia X11 server driver due to it still using old parts from dri1 apis in that no other driver still uses. Xwayland version of X11 server using EGLStreams for closed source nvidia is in fact using all modern X11 API.

              Yes in theory a pure X11 server not on top of wayland should stand a chance. But when the X11 server native configurations like the following you have problems.
              Section "Device"
              Identifier "nvidia"
              Driver "nvidia"
              Result in X11 server using API/ABI that are deprecated due to known defects that make performance unstable its the other way over.

              Xwayland is all modern API/ABI usage so even with a Nvidia card using xwayland by EGLStreams you don't have those historic gitches.

              Some ways if xwayland EGLStreams stuff could be made stock wayland and Nvidia move to just being a modesetting driver under server things could be way better.

              Here is a good question why in hell does server have a driver in userspace. Xwayland shows fairly much userspace of X11 could be a single userspace driver for modern cards.

              Kernel mode graphics drivers make sense since libglvnd was added to opengl and is part of vulkan out the box really the usermode drivers are ceasing to make much sense since libglvnd happened. On most graphics cards 2d acceleration is done by opengl calls if or if not a driver is loaded. You don't look to x11 to query what the graphics card is because notice the Identifier bit in the X11 configuration you can change that to what ever crap you want so cannot be trusted.

              Yes its a hard reality to wake up Nvidia and others are going to all these effort to make X11 server user-mode drivers only to really ruin the experience. The fact that what the graphics vendors are doing with their individual drivers for xorg ruins the experience is why xwayland can win.

              debianxfce basically there is more here than you are considering. You have completely missed how Nvidia and other vendors with xorg without wayland successfully shoot themselves in the foot. Wayland interface restrictions was hopefully to stop video card vendors shooting self in foot and give users a bad time.


              • #27
                Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
                You must really believe in gnome3 and wayland to use them. 10 years under development and still under construction.
                Would help if you got your time frame right.

                Wayland started 2008 as weston. Gnome only starts with Wayland support in 2013. Gnome 3 is like the point vista/windows 7 was 5 years in. Yes the first 2 years of Windows 7 minor graphics glitches were turning up too.

                Yes the protocol and Weston have had 10 years of development this does not mean each compositor has had that long.

                Its not believe in Gnome at this point since middle of last year there have been advantages to the Wayland options.


                • #28
                  Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
                  There is zero advantages in gnome3 and wayland compared to Xfce and X. Xorg developers have more work to do because of wayland and end users are having a buggy system. Gnome3 is driving the graphical desktop backwards, it is keyboard focused, not freely configurable, resource hog, buggy and slow.
                  Sorry this is debainxfce living in denial. The worst wayland compostitor choice being Gnome 3 at this stage has high min framerates than X11 server without a windows manager using Nvidia drivers. So you add xfce you just in fact make matters of min frame performance even worse. This can be demonstrated in benchmarks repeatably.

                  Gnome is highly mouse/touch focused in fact more to touch that is in the Human Interface Guidelines document

                  Being touched focused gnome does get horrible for us using keyboard and mouse because stack of stuff is oversized for finger tips so taking up more screen space. More stacking of menus and the like because of having to support fingers,

                  Not freely configurable is also bull crap. Yes Gnome 3 once you can get into the dconf is very configurable. Problem due to everything being design for touch getting there can be quite deep click paths. Yes Click paths lacking keyboard short cuts at times so any claim of keyboard focused is total bull.

                  Basically you just thrown stones while standing in a glass house debianxfce. X11 not on Wayland like it or not is badly broken by the third party drivers because they are using deprecated API/ABI with the result anything based on it is slow.

                  I give resource hog and buggy are valid issues with gnome 3. But slow is subjective particular areas it running rings around the x11/xfce solution. I don't exactly blame xfce for this I would like to see a xfce wayland port most to get away from crappy closed source drivers messing with the X11 server so killing performance and in fact have something competitive. The fact that xfce is having it head handed to it repeatedly in benchmarks can only be ignored for so long.

                  debianxfce how many times are you going to post this far incorrect only very basic research is required to prove you are completely wrong.



                  • #29
                    Originally posted by debianxfce View Post

                    When extensions are written with javascript, memory usage increases for each installed extension a lot. Extensions and the gnome3 desktop run slow too. Requiring to Install functionality that is built in other desktops is stupid. It is from hell to use the gnome3 desktop.
                    Any runtime plugin system is going to consume more memory when you enable more plugins. That should be obvious. Let me fill you in on something: without JS, these kinds of runtime UI patching modifications would not even be possible. That's the advantage and drawback of the system. You gain the flexibility to alter Gnome in any way you like, but you pay a cost in resources. It has nothing to do with JS itself. QML is JS also but people only whine about Gnome apps because they hate Gnome and don't know much about JavaScript.

                    When you say "these features should be built-in", which ones? What should the UI look like? What features should it have? Who should maintain the feature? What if we disagree on what is important? The plugin system is a great way to resolve this issue. You can choose as many or as few as you want and you are not disturbed by unnecessary clutter from what you don't use. Plus there is no burden on Gnome developers since they are independently maintained.

                    The Gnome desktop is not slow for me. Works great on my 2015 era laptop. I have some extensions installed but not 40+ or anything like that. The resource usage will vary greatly depending on the plugin. A dock is obviously going to use more memory than a little bandwidth monitor, for example. If you like XFCE that is great, but can you customize it to look like Gnome 3? No you can't, because the UI is not coded to be flexible like that. Instead of these extensions you will have predefined panel items. If those are good enough then you will be happy. If not, you're out of luck. (I would not be happy in XFCE land)


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
                      I did test gnome3 with ubuntu live from a fast usb3 memory stick, I could not use the desktop because I could not see the default small font at 4K resolution. A full screen start menu is horrible in a 28 inch monitor. No easy way to use desktop launchers or change the activities menu. Gnome3 uses many times more RAM than Xfce for less functionality. It feels slow compared to Xfce with Ryzen 5 1600 and RX 570 as do win10. No hardware is enough fast to run gnome3, kde and win10 desktops. They all have a poor design and implementation.
                      Has have been with a out of date version of gnome because desktop launchers came back in 3.30.

                      Ubuntu theming of gnome is horrible with a fixed theme not a dpi adjusting one(yes there are such gnome themes that do dpi adjust).. Yes a distribution could theme xfce also to be horrible on 4k monitor and that is not xfce fault either right.

                      Being designed for touch is what make activities menu editing curse. Touch means not design well for right click
                      Yep you want to edit activities menu its
                      "System" -> "Preferences" -> "Main menu"
                      Yep you can edit and delete the menu edit tool out the menu as well. This is over kill in the feature department.

                      Newer versions of xfce loss it built in main menu editor and you have to use third parties. At last gnome does provide their own here. So current day gnome vs current day xfce on editing menu with only xfce or gnome parts gnome wins.

                      I can see you have not used current versions of xfce to know what is gone.

                      Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
                      You can make the Xfce desktop look and feel what you want.
                      You can make it look and feel what ever you want is why gnome is so memory heavy with all gnome javascript you can bend it to look like anything including the default xfce. Problem is all this lack of hard coding and dynamic coding comes at one hell of a memory and cpu foot print.

                      Really we don't want highly dynamically changeable windows managers/compositors most of the time they are too resource hungry.