• Lets_Eat_Grandma@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Two problems:

    • Benchmarks are not real world performance.

    • Video card drivers are still not up to snuff as they are with windows, to the best of my knowledge. (don’t kill me if i’m wrong!)

    • schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      It depends: if you’re talking rasterization performance, then yeah, they’re pretty much on parity.

      If you’re talking about all the other things a video card does that’s not strictly make-pixel-light-up, then it’s very much a mixed bag.

    • Jure Repinc@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      From my experince AMD drivers are pretty close, I’d even say slightly better on GNU/Linux, definitely more stable and consistent. For Nvidia, yeah they are bad at supporting GNU/Linux. Improved a lot through the years but still not there. For Intel, well not exactly an option for gaming, at least not the integrated GPUs I have used so far, but still better than in Windows in a similar way as in AMD case.

      P.S. Another great thing with libre/opensource GNU/Linux drivers: When you report a bug with Mesa3D drivers the bug is quite quickly fixed, especially when you can provide them with backtrace and/or Vulkan/OpenGL API trace. Doing a bisect of source code commits amd identifying the commit that introduced a regression also help a great deal. Good luck doing the same with closed/Windows drivers: you can wait for years and no fix.