Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Radeon Linux 4.6 + Mesa 11.3 vs. NVIDIA Linux Performance & Perf-Per-Watt

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

  • #21
    Originally posted by ashtasu View Post
    Michael, just an FYI on something I've found interesting.

    On Ubuntu, the performance on my R9 390 with the latest mesa from git has been AWFUL. And from two different PPA's.

    However on openSUSE and Manjaro, mesa-git has been fantastic performance wise.

    CS:GO was stuttering horribly on Ubuntu, not on the others.
    Forgive me for chiming in but so far all steam games run better on Arch/Manjaro.

    I'm curious what the performance percentage differential would be in your case: Ubuntu vs openSUSE or Arch/Manjaro

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by ElectricPrism View Post

      Forgive me for chiming in but so far all steam games run better on Arch/Manjaro.

      I'm curious what the performance percentage differential would be in your case: Ubuntu vs openSUSE or Arch/Manjaro

      I second this. Judging from what people are saying Ubuntu doesn't perform as well with open source drivers. Curious what the performance delta is for Arch.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by SaucyJack View Post


        I second this. Judging from what people are saying Ubuntu doesn't perform as well with open source drivers. Curious what the performance delta is for Arch.
        Probably newsworthy. On Arch there is also the AUR, like ubuntu PPAs but you find more bleeding edge stuff there.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by debianxfce View Post

          Internet is difficult to use.

          DX11 3D games do not work with wine. Initial 2D dx11 support is implemented, see phoronix article.
          Doom will soon have Vulkan support and wine-staging does support Vulkan. The only problem is the fucking Denuvo.
          ## VGA ##
          AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
          Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by debianxfce View Post

            Internet is difficult to use.

            DX11 3D games do not work with wine. Initial 2D dx11 support is implemented, see phoronix article.
            The Doom engine uses OpenGL.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by theriddick View Post
              Wonder how well Doom would run in Wine?

              Its DP1.4 I believe.
              Doom was said to run quite well, I think. At least the beta.
              You can get that with DP 1.3 (up-to-date is 1.2, there are no 1.3 monitors yet).

              Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
              Internet is difficult to use.

              DX11 3D games do not work with wine. Initial 2D dx11 support is implemented, see phoronix article.
              Yes it is Doom uses OpenGL, not D3D11.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by atomsymbol
                Why would it be more problematic to port to Linux than other software components packaged in Doom?
                There is no way to run Denuvo (a windows DRM) can be ported without basically cracking it.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by darkbasic View Post

                  Doom will soon have Vulkan support and wine-staging does support Vulkan. The only problem is the fucking Denuvo.
                  Why not add denuvo-spoofing/support to wine? ;D

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by atomsymbol
                    Cracking:

                    As far as I know, an x86 CPU doesn't have a unique private key and public key built into the processor. The CPU has no encryption unit utilizing such a private key. There is no hardware encryption of memory.

                    If the encryption-related bits used by Denuvo aren't partially hidden in the hardware (CPU, memory, PCIe card), there exists a way to crack it.

                    Porting:

                    Porting is much easier than cracking.
                    What part of "a windows DRM cannot run on linux because it is made for a completely different system" you didn't get?

                    It's unlikely that they will allow a DRM-less version for linux. It would be an easy way to sidestep the DRM and an assistence to the DRM-cracking teams that get DRM-less binaries to make comparisons with and reverse-engineer to work on windows too.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by atomsymbol
                      My mind != your mind.
                      Point taken, I didn't express myself clearly the first time.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X