Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu 17.04 Gaming Performance: Budgie vs. GNOME vs. KDE Plasma vs. MATE vs. Unity vs. Xfce

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

  • Ubuntu 17.04 Gaming Performance: Budgie vs. GNOME vs. KDE Plasma vs. MATE vs. Unity vs. Xfce

    Phoronix: Ubuntu 17.04 Gaming Performance: Budgie vs. GNOME vs. KDE Plasma vs. MATE vs. Unity vs. Xfce

    One of the immediate requests that usually comes in with each new Ubuntu release is a comparison of the Linux gaming performance when trying out the different desktop options. From yesterday's Ubuntu 17.04 release, here are Steam Linux gaming tests with Budgie, GNOME Shell, KDE Plasma 5, MATE, Unity 7, and Xfce4 when using an AMD Polaris graphics card on the RadeonSI driver stack.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=24499

  • #2
    Right. For the most part, the DE doesn't matter. That's how it should be.

    Comment


    • #3
      Kinda funny how people always says Unity is so slow for gaming. When this mostly shows the opposite or just as good as any of the other DEs.

      Not intended as a flamebait.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by grenadecx View Post
        Kinda funny how people always says Unity is so slow for gaming. When this mostly shows the opposite or just as good as any of the other DEs.

        Not intended as a flamebait.
        Less funny, more sad that the community holds this belief even when regularly shown the opposite. Also, did you notice the non-composited desktops usually lost to the composited desktops? (except for that one bungie and gnome3 test... what happened? that's a bug for sure) I still see the myth that non-composited desktops are better for gaming online, all-the-time in the linux community.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by bug77 View Post
          Right. For the most part, the DE doesn't matter. That's how it should be.
          Are you kidding me? Plasma topped out in stability of the framerate... i geuss i should stick for a while anyway...

          Comment


          • #6
            I love how these have evened out. After years of seeing the Plasma desktop at the bottom of these lists, to see it at or near the top, but more importantly, to no longer see a huge difference between the desktops... it's just wonderful.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by dh04000 View Post

              Less funny, more sad that the community holds this belief even when regularly shown the opposite. Also, did you notice the non-composited desktops usually lost to the composited desktops? (except for that one bungie and gnome3 test... what happened? that's a bug for sure) I still see the myth that non-composited desktops are better for gaming online, all-the-time in the linux community.
              They do have some compositing enabled by default its just not opengl compositing. I haven't used mate in a while but xfce compositing it doesn't shut off when a full screen game starts.

              Comment


              • #8
                As a Mate user I use openbox+compton. This is probably for marco+/- software with software most likely on as that seems to be the (other/out-of-box) standard these days. I'm not really trying to advocate tweaks and turns here but just saying this doesn't do justice to the desktop. For Ubuntu mate you have tweak-tool and it at least allows for Compton out of the box. People interested in (steam) gaming performance will opt for that option anyway. People looking for bells and whistles as in unity or KDE would avoid Mate anyway regardless of performance. I understand the out of the box philosophy I really do. However when it's a click of a button to me it makes more sense to keep the retro-paradigm distros out of it as it doesn't really do anything for Mate or the other distros in comparison for that matter. - Also the point of a Ubuntu test should be to test Ubuntu performance which makes it pointless albeit obvious to show known performance drops so very specifically related to Mate.

                Comment


                • #9
                  gnome is on wayland?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by dh04000 View Post

                    Also, did you notice the non-composited desktops usually lost to the composited desktops? (except for that one bungie and gnome3 test... what happened? that's a bug for sure) I still see the myth that non-composited desktops are better for gaming online, all-the-time in the linux community.
                    These DEs are all composited by default ... only Ubuntu flavor which is not is LXDE i think, but that is missing here

                    Michael should do plain OpenBox session so we can draw picture of composite related slowness of some DE... Regardless, composite will hit its slowness here and there regardless of DE used, put into POV also fact that same compositors might behave differently on different drivers too, say on this one this is slow and on another something else is slow, etc...

                    It isn't a myth that composite eats some resources, also it isn't myth that there is no perfect same compositor which works the same with all drivers and all apps outhere... no way.

                    For most performance even overclockers makes Windows first look like shit, just because everything you see (and some things you don't) eats some cycles... not composite only but any effect even plain font antialiasing that modernity takes for granted, even clock counter, etc...
                    Last edited by dungeon; 04-14-2017, 11:29 AM.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X