Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu 20.04 GNOME X.Org vs. Wayland Session Performance Impact For Gaming

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

  • Originally posted by jacob View Post
    This is pure drivel. ...
    Right back at you. Why do you even reply to it then, do you know? Of course you don't, but I can tell you why... you're trying to convince yourself of Wayland. So keep comparing it to MacOS or keep telling yourself it had no downsides. You're a dreamer. And don't worry about what I'm "whining about". It's beyond your abilities.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by pal666 View Post
      i have 240hz monitor, thank you. and if your monitor is 60 hz, you can't have higher fps because monitor can't show you more than 60 frames per secons
      What is baffling is why some people complain about the limit of frequency from their monitor vs a gamin app without restriction of displayed frames per secon. V-sync before and now freesync were made to adjust those. Those methods were done of both consoles and gaming arcade boards for a long time.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by sdack View Post
        Right back at you. Why do you even reply to it then, do you know? Of course you don't, but I can tell you why... you're trying to convince yourself of Wayland. So keep comparing it to MacOS or keep telling yourself it had no downsides. You're a dreamer. And don't worry about what I'm "whining about". It's beyond your abilities.
        I don't have to "convince myself" of anything because 1) unlike you I actually understand what I'm talking about (hint: Wayland is not a new way to run X11 software on Linux, which you don't seem to be able to comprehend); 2) unlike you I'm not a zealous fanboy who will stick to your misguided beliefs and cry "la la la not listening" even after more or less everyone on this forum has comprehensively debunked and demolished them; and 3) unlike you I can read and I've actually read the benchmark whose numbers still seem to evade you.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by tildearrow View Post

          Did you just tell us that GNOME won and it should be the only desktop?!

          It's enough. You are A FREAKING DISGRACE.

          *sighs* No, you know what... I can't tolerate this. I am going to delete your post.
          Would you kindly fuck off and stop editing/wiping other users' posts just because you felt so?

          Does this site has any kind of participation rules or something that would permit this kind of behavior?
          Last edited by intelfx; 04-01-2020, 12:11 AM.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by sdack View Post
            Just more of the same excuses.
            just more of the same complete lack of clue
            Originally posted by sdack View Post
            If Wayland wasn't supposed to support X11 then it's actually quite surprising to see that X11 software runs under it.
            x11 software doesn't run under wayland. it runs under x11 on x11 server which itself is wayland software and runs under wayland. that x11 server is called xwayland
            Originally posted by sdack View Post
            Nobody but a few nerds care how it's handled under the hood, but what matters is the end result.
            nobody but a few idiots would argue that "doesn't run at all" is better than "runs at 99.99% speed"
            Last edited by pal666; 04-01-2020, 06:26 AM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by sdack View Post
              It was supposed to support X11 and to replace it, which is why it has the support for it or we wouldn't be having this discussion.
              it was never supposed to support x11, there's x11 for that. it was supposed to be x12, but obviously there's a lot of legacy x11 software in the wild which will never be ported to x12, so there should be some way to run in under wayland. just like some legacy win32 software will never be ported to linux and we need wine to run it and not necessarily faster than native linux build
              Originally posted by sdack View Post
              I guess you'll never stop making excuses and keep trying to side-track the lack of performance. It's only not going away. Only people will go away and stop paying attention to it, which I assume is why after all these years it just doesn't find many fans.
              i guess you'll never stop being an idiot

              Comment


              • Originally posted by sdack View Post
                No, you're just limiting your own comprehension. Of course can one support it and replace it.
                moron, what you are trying to describe is called "extend". "replace" is mutually incompatible with "support". "extend" is what x11 was doing since 1987 and by now it's in a dead end

                Comment


                • Originally posted by sdack View Post
                  No, there is nothing "legacy" about running games on Linux.
                  moron, nobody said that. "running games" isn't legacy. but some games are legacy. and some games are not legacy by themselves, but use sdl which have native wayland support, but can be run in legacy x11 mode. and this benchmark was run in legacy x11 mode
                  Originally posted by sdack View Post
                  when you say Wayland isn't supposed to support X11 (when in fact it is).
                  in fact you are idiot who is unable to learn
                  Originally posted by sdack View Post
                  You're not going to claim Wayland has turned Windows apps into "legacy Windows apps", or do you?
                  of course not, that was linux. linux has turned windows apps into "legacy Windows apps"
                  Originally posted by sdack View Post
                  do you in fact want Wayland to be the successor to X11 when you give X11 apps the "legacy" status.
                  you can't have successor to x11 without giving x11 apps the "legacy" status. if they aren't legacy, then there's no succession
                  Originally posted by sdack View Post
                  Your problem only is that Wayland isn't a suitable successor
                  that's your (imaginary) problem
                  Originally posted by sdack View Post
                  So who wants to use Wayland when the most demanding applications still run better under old X11?
                  games will run better under wayland. this benchmark was not running them under wayland, it was running them under x11 or under x11+wayland
                  Last edited by pal666; 04-01-2020, 06:11 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by sdack View Post
                    Oh, I know. And you're adding more excuses to the pile. Nothing is changing these benchmark results.
                    moron, nobody is trying to change these results. these results are wonderful: wayland is so fast that stacking it on top of x11 doesn't make games slower. which means getting rid of x11 will make games even faster

                    Comment


                    • intelfx +1. This is a highly questionable kind of censorship. Based on feelings. Based on assumptions. Based on prejudice.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X