SteamOS 2.0/"Brewmaster" performs like dog shit in comparison to Windows 10 for playing games accord
58 replies, posted
[url]http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/11/ars-benchmarks-show-significant-performance-hit-for-steamos-gaming/[/url]
[quote=Ars Technica]Since Valve started publicly talking about its own Linux-powered "Steam Boxes" about three years ago now, we've wondered what kind of effect a new gaming-focused OS would have on overall PC gaming performance. On the one hand, Valve said back in 2012 that it was able to get substantial performance increases on an OpenGL-powered Linux port of Left 4 Dead 2. On the other hand, developers I talked to about SteamOS development earlier this year told me that the state of Linux's drivers, OpenGL tools, and game engines often made it hard to get Windows-level performance on SteamOS, especially if a game was built with DirectX in mind in the first place.
With this week's official launch of Valve's Linux-based Steam Machine line (for non-pre-orders), we decided to see if the new OS could stand up to the established Windows standard when running games on the same hardware. Unfortunately for open source gaming supporters, it looks like SteamOS gaming comes with a significant performance hit on a number of benchmarks.
To start our tests, we dragged out the dual-boot SteamOS/Windows machine we first built nearly two years ago (when making our own dual-boot how-to guide) and got all the operating systems and drivers up to date. The hardware on that bare bones machine is a little out of date now, but since that hardware is remaining static for both sides of the test, it should suffice for giving an idea of the relative performance between the operating systems.[/quote]
IMO the drivers are pretty optimized as far as what can be done given the current Linux video architecture, if you happen to be a Nvidia user. AMD is a lot more murky. Really though, I've tried a few more demanding games between Linux and windows (CiV V and cities skylines notably) and the Linux versions of those games run much worse just as a general rule seemingly. This points a lot towards lazy ports. And to be honest, why would you put a ton of effort into that extra 1% of customers on PC, (with PC being a minority of customers in a lot of games as it is) is how most companies probably see it. Valve's ports naturally run pretty good, given that they have a point to drive home about steam on Linux. For everyone else who doesn't have anything invested in it, they may release a hastily done port in order to just tick the box. Vulkan probably will not be any magic bullet either, as it shoves a lot of the back-end side optimization onto the developer, and while that allows for flexibility also takes time+skills+money. For games that are poorly optimized as it is, this will change little in the way of performance.
[QUOTE=nintenman1;49114016]IMO the drivers are pretty optimized as far as what can be done given the current Linux video architecture, if you happen to be a Nvidia user. AMD is a lot more murky. Really though, I've tried a few more demanding games between Linux and windows (CiV V and cities skylines notably) and the Linux versions of those games run much worse just as a general rule seemingly. This points a lot towards lazy ports. And to be honest, why would you put a ton of effort into that extra 1% of customers on PC, (with PC being a minority of customers in a lot of games as it is) is how most companies probably see it. Valve's ports naturally run pretty good, given that they have a point to drive home about steam on Linux. For everyone else who doesn't have anything invested in it, they may release a hastily done port in order to just tick the box. Vulkan probably will not be any magic bullet either, as it shoves a lot of the back-end side optimization onto the developer, and while that allows for flexibility also takes time+skills+money. For games that are poorly optimized as it is, this will change little in the way of performance.[/QUOTE]
Civ V runs far better on ubuntu than windows for me(I experience occasional framerate drops, and sometimes the window locks itself on top in Windows, but it never does that in Ubuntu).
game performance on other platforms is very much a YMMV, but luckily, engines like UE4 and maybe Unity are being designed for linux as a main platform. So, if you want AAA games, you may be out of luck on linux, but things made in engines like those run damn well.
Also, I have no idea why someone would make a game with DirectX as a target, unless they were paid by MS. Like all graphics libraries, OpenGL is super easy to learn, so long as you know how graphics work.
[QUOTE]On the one hand, Valve said back in 2012 that it was able to get substantial performance increases on an OpenGL-powered Linux port of Left 4 Dead 2[/QUOTE]
This is the result of a misunderstanding by some goons who had no idea what they're talking about misunderstanding this article from valve:
[QUOTE]The OpenGL-based Linux port of L4D2 runs at 315 FPS, the Direct3D-based Windows version runs at 270.6 FPS, and the OpenGL-based Windows version runs at 303 FPS.[/QUOTE]
303 to 315 FPS is a frametime decrease of 0.00013s to render a frame. For reference that same deduction in time to render a frame at 30FPS would result in an increase to ~30.1FPS. That is not "substantial". A bunch of people read "Wow an increase of 12 frames per second, I'd love that!" without understanding that at a really high FPS, that tiny decrease in frametime counts for a lot more than at a low FPS. The direct3d version was a fair bit worse (likely because it was much, much older) but going from d3d windows to opengl linux would still only be enough to get you an extra 0.4FPS from 30.
'DirectX games ported to OpenGL have better performance in DirectX'
'OEM Graphics Card drivers are still better for Windows than for Linux'
[i]shocking revelations[/i]
[QUOTE=krutomisi;49114314]'DirectX games ported to OpenGL have better performance in DirectX'
'OEM Graphics Card drivers are still better for Windows than for Linux'
[i]shocking revelations[/i][/QUOTE]
well yeah that is kinda the point currently. Who is going to make a game and target linux/OpenGL first on desktop PC? The nvidia driver is quite good like I said, it is only really AMD that has a lot of issues with their driver performance.
Games are made to target directX on desktop x86/64 due to the fact that it is the most fleshed out and best performing graphics API on windows. OpenGL specifically isn't used in large part by consoles historically, (playstation has gone between PSGL and GNM, xbox has used a subset of directX, nintendo also has their own custom gfx api). Usually mac ports of most games were the only prior reason to have any sort of OpenGL renderpath, and a lot of the time those versions seem to be ported/wrapped from the directx version well after release because it doesn't for whatever reason make sense to do it from the getgo (I don't run a game dev studio so can't say one way or another). There is also some level of shared code since the early 2000s with xbox console and windows with regard to directX.
Some linux ports are using commercial middleware to run windows code on linux rather than going the whole 9 yards with a port, such as the software from these guys: [URL="http://www.vpltd.com/services/"]http://www.vpltd.com/services/[/URL] Both the witcher 2 and bioshock infinite are ported using that solution, and for what is for the most part a click to run solution the performance is pretty alright too. Wine is something I have noticed a few linux steam games packaged with as well (hotline Miami).
[QUOTE=nintenman1;49114463]
... it is only really AMD that has a lot of issues with their driver performance.
[/QUOTE]
Thankfully, this is about to change with AMD not only pushing for better open source drivers, but additionally they're also improving a lot of the existing codebases, while those drivers [b]still[/b] maintain support for running cards that don't even work on Windows. I mean, my ATi Radeon HD 4670 w/1G vRAM runs great on Linux, despite it being an "older" card. I mean, it runs almost all the latest games, with the only limitation being OpenGL 4.X support lacking from it.
However, due to these drivers, it now has OpenGL 3.3 support, something that wasn't originally possible with the Windows drivers. I can't even use the card on Windows anymore, due to being an unsupported card now.
But not only that, with just adding things like power management to the latest R9 285 cards open source drivers, the FPS was now often trippled the only-just-playable FPS it had before, and sometimes it was even five times the original ([url=http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amdgpu-powerplay-test&num=1]source[/url])
Anyway, but in case being that while the official efforts of these graphics card proprietary drivers haven't been the best, te open source drivers show promise of soon being better than their proprietary opposites, inluding the well integrated code that is possible only due to an open system.
[QUOTE=nintenman1;49114463]
Games are made to target directX on desktop x86/64 due to the fact that it is the most fleshed out and best performing graphics API on windows.[/QUOTE]
This may be a true sidepoint, but the fact of matter is that it's just been the most popular, just as why Windows is still the number one used platform for desktop systems (as the only dominant platform). It's popular.
There's not a whole lot of technical reasons for OpenGL vs Direct3D anymore.
[QUOTE=nintenman1;49114463]
Wine is something I have noticed a few linux steam games packaged with as well (hotline Miami).
[/QUOTE]
Where did you get this? I just ldd'd my hotline binary, and there are no wine binaries, and nothing related to wine included in the lib directory. Not for the first one, anyway. It pretty much just depends on X11 and a few XCB libraries, and that's about it. Hotline Miami is one of the more well-done ports.
[QUOTE=nintenman1;49114016]why would you put a ton of effort into that extra 1% of customers on PC[/QUOTE]
Because they're trying to change the fact that it's only 1%?
Gotta say, Valve really fucked up with the whole Steam machine / SteamOS thing.
The real problem is they are already so many millions in and can't pull back now. How are they ever going to get out of this short of scrapping the whole thing?
[QUOTE=MendozaMan;49115532]Gotta say, Valve really fucked up with the whole Steam machine / SteamOS thing.
The real problem is they are already so many millions in and can't pull back now. How are they ever going to get out of this short of scrapping the whole thing?[/QUOTE]
I assume the smart thing to do would be to stick with it and and improve it.
That being said, the media at large seems to love to throw shit at Linux without any real understanding of anything that it's gonna be hard to get consumers to buy into any of this.
[QUOTE=Lyokanthrope;49115609]I assume the smart thing to do would be to stick with it and and improve it.
That being said, the media at large seems to love to throw shit at Linux without any real understanding of anything that it's gonna be hard to get consumers to buy into any of this.[/QUOTE]
For general consuming linux is quite bad still. At least compared to Win or OSX.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49115644]For general consuming linux is quite bad still. At least compared to Win or OSX.[/QUOTE]
how is Linux bad for general consuming? it works great for general use like checking mails, writing documents, using the internet, and so on. it starts falling short as soon as you intend to use it for either gaming (where it has begun gaining traction) and professional work. I don't see how it's any worse than Windows and OS X for these basic things
[QUOTE=willtheoct;49114235]
Also, I have no idea why someone would make a game with DirectX as a target, unless they were paid by MS. Like all graphics libraries, OpenGL is super easy to learn, so long as you know how graphics work.[/QUOTE]
The Xbox systems still use DirectX and IIRC PS4 uses something that's similar to DirectX.
[QUOTE=PredGD;49115702]how is Linux bad for general consuming? it works great for general use like checking mails, writing documents, using the internet, and so on. it starts falling short as soon as you intend to use it for either gaming (where it has begun gaining traction) and professional work. I don't see how it's any worse than Windows and OS X for these basic things[/QUOTE]
Well, it's definitely not flawless. There's many times where you'll have to throw yourself into a terminal to fix/disable something, which is irritating and moreso scary for a lot of people.
(which is by itself another big problem I have with consumers who buy/use things they don't even make an [I]attempt[/I] to understand...)
I agree, however, but people are stupid as shit.
[QUOTE=Durrsly;49115712]The Xbox systems still use DirectX and IIRC PS4 uses something that's similar to DirectX.[/QUOTE]
Saying "PS4 uses something similar to DirectX" doesn't say much, especially considering that OpenGL itself is similar to DirectX
[editline]14th November 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Satane;49115778]All linux distros I've tried were pretty clunky. It gets the job done but it's just not as smooth as windows/osx.[/QUOTE]
A few years ago I definitely would've agreed with you - but as far as desktop user experience, stuff like GNOME 3 and Elementary OS are definitely getting there.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49115644]For general consuming linux is quite bad still. At least compared to Win or OSX.[/QUOTE]
Depends on what you do. I assume you mean as a general computing unit such as a desktop and laptop, and I'd be inclined to say that it depends.
But if we go into any other area other than the above mentioned, Linux is already king. Smart TV? Servers? IoT? Hell, those digital audio processing units probably runs Linux, as does just about every display panel in the world. It's everywhere, with the exception of gaming areas, and this is mostly due to the fact that Windows was already dominant in the desktop area, and had forced out DirectX to most major parties, and is still doing so.
Windows owns for historical reasons, and only as a sideeffect of that, for technical reasons. In areas unrelated to graphical fidelity (and we're not talking rendering, because Linux is pretty darn great in that area too), it really is the go to platform. Especially for consumer devices.
[QUOTE=PredGD;49115702]how is Linux bad for general consuming? it works great for general use like checking mails, writing documents, using the internet, and so on. it starts falling short as soon as you intend to use it for either gaming (where it has begun gaining traction) and [B]professional work[/B]. I don't see how it's any worse than Windows and OS X for these basic things[/QUOTE]
This depends on the work. Using Linux for software development work is a godsend compared to Windows. Even if that software runs on windows in the end.
[QUOTE=PredGD;49115702]how is Linux bad for general consuming? it works great for general use like checking mails, writing documents, using the internet, and so on. it starts falling short as soon as you intend to use it for either gaming (where it has begun gaining traction) and professional work. I don't see how it's any worse than Windows and OS X for these basic things[/QUOTE]
Its changing, but there still a lot of shit you have to use in terminal and the abstractions get to people.
Also, if the dumbest or oldest of people can't use, why would you think someone who works 9 to 5 in some office or supermarket wants to?
[QUOTE=Juggernog;49115788]Saying "PS4 uses something similar to DirectX" doesn't say much, especially considering that OpenGL itself is similar to DirectX
[editline]14th November 2015[/editline]
A few years ago I definitely would've agreed with you - but as far as desktop user experience, stuff like GNOME 3 and Elementary OS are definitely getting there.[/QUOTE]
I don't know what considerably intensive programming that's available on Windows that's also on Linux, such as Photoshop, 3D Modeling, video rendering, etc. But say we're not talking about that, and just general stuff. Email, a web browser, a instant messaging platform. The improvements that Linux would provide in performance are negligible to what you'd miss out on for Windows.
[QUOTE=Swilly;49116114]Its changing, but there still a lot of shit you have to use in terminal and the abstractions get to people.
Also, if the dumbest or oldest of people can't use, why would you think someone who works 9 to 5 in some office or supermarket wants to?[/QUOTE]
there is a lot of tinkering in the terminal, sure, but I can't think of a situation where I've ever needed to do much work in the terminal to get a basic system up and running which would be sufficient for anyone who doesn't use their computer for much else other than the essentials. there might be stuff like installing a browser or an e-mail client which I'd say is tougher to do on Linux compared to Windows for someone who is used to Windows, but it's just a matter of learning it. personally, I find it a lot more convenient and easier to download and install programs on Linux as I've actually learnt it. in a workplace scenario, this wouldn't even be an issue as someone has already set it up for them. stuff like Mint, Ubuntu, ElementaryOS, maybe even Debian and Fedora (though not sure) are ready to be used as a general machine after the graphical installation. if you want to customize stuff or do more power user stuff, then yes, you're gonna have to use the terminal. doing the same in Windows is potentially easier if what we're thinking of is similar, but at this level, people who aren't computer savvy wouldn't even be able to do this, even on Windows.
[QUOTE=LegndNikko;49116165]I don't know what considerably intensive programming that's available on Windows that's also on Linux, such as Photoshop, 3D Modeling, video rendering, etc. But say we're not talking about that, and just general stuff. Email, a web browser, a instant messaging platform. The improvements that Linux would provide in performance are negligible to what you'd miss out on for Windows.[/QUOTE]Not to mention if you're stuck and need to do something on windows, google is full of info and various ways on doing what you need. On linux? You will need to dig. The options on linux are a lot more limited for casual users. And the options that are available are often harder to set up if you deviate from the path of "approved" apps. Linux is not ready for mainstream casual market, no idea why some people can't understand that. It also does not offer casual market anything that windows does not have. The opposite if anything. The only advantage obvious to a casual is that it's free, but then again they can call up their cousin's nephew and ask for a windows unlocker or something.
[editline]14th November 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=PredGD;49116195]there is a lot of tinkering in the terminal, sure, but I can't think of a situation where I've ever needed to do much work in the terminal to get a basic system up and running which would be sufficient for anyone who doesn't use their computer for much else other than the essentials. there might be stuff like installing a browser or an e-mail client which I'd say is tougher to do on Linux compared to Windows for someone who is used to Windows, but it's just a matter of learning it. personally, I find it a lot more convenient and easier to download and install programs on Linux as I've actually learnt it. in a workplace scenario, this wouldn't even be an issue as someone has already set it up for them. stuff like Mint, Ubuntu, ElementaryOS, maybe even Debian and Fedora (though not sure) are ready to be used as a general machine after the graphical installation. if you want to customize stuff or do more power user stuff, then yes, you're gonna have to use the terminal. doing the same in Windows is potentially easier if what we're thinking of is similar, but at this level, people who aren't computer savvy wouldn't even be able to do this, even on Windows.[/QUOTE]
On windows there's an app for that. On linux there's a command for that. People who use computers to browse the internet would rather pick an app I think.
[QUOTE=Juggernog;49115788]Saying "PS4 uses something similar to DirectX" doesn't say much, especially considering that OpenGL itself is similar to DirectX
[editline]14th November 2015[/editline].[/QUOTE]
From what I read, Sony had made essentially a clone of DirectX rather than use PSGL/OpenGl like on the PS3.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49116216]Not to mention if you're stuck and need to do something on windows, google is full of info and various ways on doing what you need. On linux? You will need to dig. [/QUOTE]
if you have an issue in Linux and need to google it, you'll have no issues finding a solution. there's loads of communities and forums dedicated to exactly these problems, I have very, very rarely never found my problem when googling. I'd also argue it's way easier to find your exact problem as Linux likes to give you informative errors rather than obscure "missing something, this won't work". Linux tells you specifically what library you're missing or what whatever else it might be. if not, you can always easily enable verbose mode which can be even more helpful. which in a lot of cases can eliminate googling completely as you already know the source of the problem. Windows does this at times as well, but it's often Windows never tells you what's wrong other than that there is a problem.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49116216]The options on linux are a lot more limited for casual users. And the options that are available are often harder to set up if you deviate from the path of "approved" apps. Linux is not ready for mainstream casual market, no idea why some people can't understand that. It also does not offer casual market anything that windows does not have. The opposite if anything. The only advantage obvious to a casual is that it's free, but then again they can call up their cousin's nephew and ask for a windows unlocker or something.[/QUOTE]
in what ways is Linux inferior compared to Windows and OS X for the casual market? you got web browsers, you got e-mail clients, you got office suites, you got chat programs, and so on. there are plenty of very easy to set up programs on Linux, but yes, if you decide to use something more obscure, there might be a lot more tinkering involved, but a casual user won't have a need for that. just like a casual user on Windows wouldn't find an obscure chat program when there are plenty of easy to use ones that are very popular. does Linux need to offer more than Windows to be attractive? why can't it offer the same amount, just in a different flavour? that's the big difference between all the OS', you use what you like. some people like apples, some people like oranges.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49116216]
On windows there's an app for that. On linux there's a command for that. People who use computers to browse the internet would rather pick an app I think.[/QUOTE]
one of the large points behind Ubuntu and its derivatives is to make Linux more user friendly for those who are not tech savvy. you got a graphical installation, you have lots of pre-installed software, you have a software center which lets you easily get everything you need. in Ubuntu, you have both apps and commands. they can choose apps if they want to, and they can use the terminal if they want that instead, you don't really need the terminal unless you're curious or you're a power user in Ubuntu.
[QUOTE=PredGD;49116306]
one of the large points behind Ubuntu and its derivatives is to make Linux more user friendly for those who are not tech savvy. you got a graphical installation, you have lots of pre-installed software, you have a software center which lets you easily get everything you need. in Ubuntu, you have both apps and commands. they can choose apps if they want to, and they can use the terminal if they want that instead, you don't really need the terminal unless you're curious or you're a power user in Ubuntu.[/QUOTE]And yet ubuntu is clunky as fuck, ugly(imo) and awfully bloated. At this point dare I say even more than windows. It's an ok alternative if you're on a budget but otherwise it got nothing over windows.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49116343]And yet ubuntu is clunky as fuck, ugly(imo) and awfully bloated. At this point dare I say even more than windows. It's an ok alternative if you're on a budget but otherwise it got nothing over windows.[/QUOTE]
there's a lot more distros than just ubuntu though, and a good alternative is, let's say, linux mint
[QUOTE=Medevila;49116330]this is a Linux drivers problem, not a SteamOS problem[/QUOTE]
It's still a problem SteamOS has.
[QUOTE=Satane;49115778]All linux distros I've tried were pretty clunky. It gets the job done but it's just not as smooth as windows/osx.[/QUOTE]
Use a barebones distro like Arch or Debian and a lightweight window manager or desktop environment.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49116343]And yet ubuntu is clunky as fuck, ugly(imo) and awfully bloated. At this point dare I say even more than windows. It's an ok alternative if you're on a budget but otherwise it got nothing over windows.[/QUOTE]
Ubuntu being clunky is most likely you thinking of Unity, which is easily solved and most importantly, your subjective experience of it. you got stuff like Xubuntu, Kubuntu, Mint, Crunchbang, Lubuntu, Elementary OS, and waaay more! the ones I listed are the most popular ones (Crunchbang died recently, but I believe it got revived by another team), but there are so many more, loads I've never even heard of which all most likely change the user experience, the amount of bloat, the look and how you interact with them.
[t]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/UbuntuFamilyTree1210.svg[/t]
the picture is very overwhelming though, I think that as well, but you don't really need to know any of these. the ones you'll hear about I've already listed at the top of the post, all of which change things around while keeping the same user friendliness as they're all derived from Ubuntu.
I would comment on the bloat, but I don't have a list of the pre-installed stuff and I don't use Ubuntu so I wouldn't know, but I am under the impression you only got "essential" programs like an office suite (Libre or Libra, can't remember what it was called), Firefox I believe, Pidgin which is a chat program, and a few others I can't remember. it's not that bad, but that opinion changes between everyone so what I find good you could find bad.
I could also say that Windows is clunky and ugly, which I don't think, but these are subjective feelings. I find Unity to work quite well.
this is the beauty with Linux, you can always get something else if you don't like one thing. with Windows, you're stuck with whatever you get with for example Windows 10. you can do change the theme, but that's all you can really do. it can be overwhelming to be presented with that many choices of course, but a casual user would just go for Ubuntu or one of the popular and easy to find derivatives.
[editline]edit[/editline]
then there's the "it got nothing over Windows". why does it need to be factually superior to it? OS X is not factually superior to Windows, but even then it's popular. oranges are not factually superior to apples either, yet people actually like oranges? picking an OS is all about picking what you enjoy using
More like the games are ported like dog shit. Same shit as console ports.
The system still has ways to go, but blaming substantial performance decreases on it is the same as blaming PC for the latest Batman being unplayable.
[QUOTE=PredGD;49116400]
then there's the "it got nothing over Windows". why does it need to be factually superior to it? OS X is not factually superior to Windows, but even then it's popular. oranges are not factually superior to apples either, yet people actually like oranges? picking an OS is all about picking what you enjoy using[/QUOTE]OSX is very good for mainstream and casual. Better than windows even. If it would run on every pc it would overtake windows in the casual market and not only. Linux tries but with no financial support or proper business management, cannot get to the audiences it strives to get. Ubuntu eats dirt when compared to OSX. Most distros do in the casual market. OSX has a large money backing, a lot of skilled professionals working on it, both programmers AND designers and it knows their target audience. Linux is kinda all over the place. Distros either lack direction or funding.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.