Windows or Ubunto?

[Psoewish]

I actually get more FPS in WoW, TF2 and CSS using Linux :P

[shkm]

Originally Posted by Psoewish I actually get more FPS in WoW, TF2 and CSS using Linux :P

Is that a max or an average?

[Psoewish]

Originally Posted by shkm Is that a max or an average?

Average

On Windows I get a bigger max, but also more frequent drops (drops being ~15-20), while on Linux, I get a very steady FPS

[shkm]

Not considering TF2 and CSS here, you're still saying WoW runs better under Linux? And I assume you run in OpenGL? Well, I've given up on it but I'm curious.

[Psoewish]

Yes it does run better, I wouldn't know how or why it does, because I didn't really change any thing. I don't think any specific configuration was needed to actually get it running either, it just did the way it did :P

Though it's been a few months, so I'm not 100% sure if there were any custom settings or so.

[dafire]

You won't get all graphical features when using -opengl (some shadow levels are even still missing in the macos opengl version).

[Vyper]

Its actually no surprise that some get better framerate under linux. The reason many consider linux weak for games if often actually a question of drivers. The linux OS is in no way inferior to Windows, and OpenGL is every bit as good as DirectX (different, but as good). The problem is almost all distributions (Ubuntu being the notable exception) ship with only open source generic drivers, which cannot harness the full power of your super duper NVIDIA mach 300000. Thus unless you replace them with the proprietary NVIDIA drivers, your frame rate sucks (if your game runs).
Once the driver problem is dealt with, most linux installs have less overhead than a standard windows (especially Vista), leaving more resources for gaming.

[shkm]

Originally Posted by Vyper Its actually no surprise that some get better framerate under linux. The reason many consider linux weak for games if often actually a question of drivers. The linux OS is in no way inferior to Windows, and OpenGL is every bit as good as DirectX (different, but as good). The problem is almost all distributions (Ubuntu being the notable exception) ship with only open source generic drivers, which cannot harness the full power of your super duper NVIDIA mach 300000. Thus unless you replace them with the proprietary NVIDIA drivers, your frame rate sucks (if your game runs). Once the driver problem is dealt with, most linux installs have less overhead than a standard windows (especially Vista), leaving more resources for gaming.

It is a given that anyone wishing to play a slightly demanding game will be installing proprietary drivers.

I am unable to understand how my machine was unable to run WoW appropriately under many distributions, using all known tweaks, if it is common for Windows native games to run better under Wine. Perhaps many people simply have Windows installs cluttered with a plethora of malware?

[Psoewish]

No, it's because Windows as an OS is bloated.

[joeba18]

yes windows is bloated but there are many things you can do to make it run better.

I wont go in detail as there are plenty of resources on the net that can get you what you need.

#1. Services.
Some services can be disabled to allow for more memory for other things.

#2. Put windows into performance mode.

#3. make sure you run defrag and system clean up at least and this is bare minimum once a month. (I usually defrag/disk clean up once a week.)

#4. Make sure you dont download and install everything under the sun.
The more you install the more your hard drive has to work.

#5. Uninstall all unneeded accessory's.

These are just some things you can do to improve performance.

[Dreadlorde]

Or, Microsoft could create a operating system that is separated from the GUI, that would probably improve performance. They also could develop a file system that doesn't fragment as much.

[Vyper]

Originally Posted by Dreadlorde Or, Microsoft could create a operating system that is separated from the GUI, that would probably improve performance. They also could develop a file system that doesn't fragment as much.

Wow! Do I sense some hostility here? I do feel the need to point out though that separating the GUI from the OS would actually likely cost in terms of performance, as there is then overhead in communication between the two. It would however likely be more maintainable, and you might be able to make up for the overhead in simplifying both. Personally the reason I would like to see a separated GUI is so that I could swap them out. Any Linux users here use Enlightenment? Clean and sexy, thats how a GUI should be.

Also NTFS has its pluses, Ex: when properly maintained (defragmented), it has a faster access rate than ext3 as files are clustered together minimizing the need for moving the read head. Its a design decision, even if its not the one I would have made :-)

[break19]

Originally Posted by Vyper Wow! Do I sense some hostility here? I do feel the need to point out though that separating the GUI from the OS would actually likely cost in terms of performance, as there is then overhead in communication between the two. It would however likely be more maintainable, and you might be able to make up for the overhead in simplifying both. Personally the reason I would like to see a separated GUI is so that I could swap them out. Any Linux users here use Enlightenment? Clean and sexy, thats how a GUI should be. Also NTFS has its pluses, Ex: when properly maintained (defragmented), it has a faster access rate than ext3 as files are clustered together minimizing the need for moving the read head. Its a design decision, even if its not the one I would have made :-)

A better idea would have been to do something more similar to MacOS's HFS+ filesystem. It is similar in function to NTFS, in that it keeps the files as close as possible, however, there is also a built-in method of defragmentation that automatically defragments the filesystem as each file is read, and if it is found to be fragmented, then it uses free cpu/io idle time to defrag that particular file. It only does this for files smaller than 20megs. (I could be wrong about the max file size, but it's somewhere in that neighborhood.)

It also prefers contiguous free space when writing -any- file to disk, unlike ntfs which just starts filling the first available block, resulting in quite a bit more fragmentation..

Obviously defragmentation is still needed occassionally for MAX performance, but the files that are modified the most, are usually files less than 20megs. The larger files, for most people, are videos, or other similar files that are rarely edited.

The major drawback to MacOS's filesystem implementation is, it's very difficult to defrag files while the partition is mounted. Only files that are not currently in use can be touched if the filesystem is mounted, at all.. So most defraggers require that you either boot into single-user mode, or (more likely) boot from a CD/DVD to run them.

break19

edit: My wife's ibook hasn't been defragged at -all- in about a year, and the last time I checked it, there was 0.4% fragmentation... big whoop.

[Yhor]

I've seen 'cubes' running around that you could have Firefox, WoW, and other apps going and visable at once (without tabs and a "Windows" look. Anyone have any idea what I'm talking about (and if it's Ubuntu I'm thinking of)?

So far I'm liking Ubuntu (using Wubi). I'm currently using GNOME, but I find it to be a lot like Windows. Is there anything you'd recommend to me that's a little more unique? (I don't mind learning curves too much, I can always start over).

Last thing (for now, sorry). Is there a good message board you could direct me to for more specific tech problems I may find myself needing solutions to? (an idiot version would be great for me )

[Dreadlorde]

Originally Posted by Yhor I've seen 'cubes' running around that you could have Firefox, WoW, and other apps going and visable at once (without tabs and a "Windows" look. Anyone have any idea what I'm talking about (and if it's Ubuntu I'm thinking of)? So far I'm liking Ubuntu (using Wubi). I'm currently using GNOME, but I find it to be a lot like Windows. Is there anything you'd recommend to me that's a little more unique? (I don't mind learning curves too much, I can always start over). Last thing (for now, sorry). Is there a good message board you could direct me to for more specific tech problems I may find myself needing solutions to? (an idiot version would be great for me )

The cube is compiz fusion, while it does look cool, it does use a lot of memory and cpu iirc.

As for something unique, I'd say try a tiling window manager like awesome. It's awesome. :P

Ubuntu also have their own forums, I don't remember the link, but you can get to them from the ubuntu website.

Originally Posted by Vyper Wow! Do I sense some hostility here? I do feel the need to point out though that separating the GUI from the OS would actually likely cost in terms of performance, as there is then overhead in communication between the two. It would however likely be more maintainable, and you might be able to make up for the overhead in simplifying both.

You have a point, but isn't that what DRI is for? From what I've read about it, DRI is supposed to help rid of the overhead between the window system and the hardware. I could be wrong (and correct me if I'm wrong).

Originally Posted by Vyper Personally the reason I would like to see a separated GUI is so that I could swap them out. Any Linux users here use Enlightenment? Clean and sexy, thats how a GUI should be.

I use awesome. (1)

Originally Posted by Vyper Also NTFS has its pluses, Ex: when properly maintained (defragmented), it has a faster access rate than ext3 as files are clustered together minimizing the need for moving the read head. Its a design decision, even if its not the one I would have made :-)

I found that with my hardware, reiserfs for my / (root) and ext2 for my /home partitons is great. I plan on trying out Btrfs and Ext4 soon though, they have a bunch of interesting features.

[Vyper]

Originally Posted by break19 A better idea would have been to do something more similar to MacOS's HFS+ filesystem.

I admit I am completely unfamiliar with Mac. Linux and Windows are my areas of expertise if one can truly be an expert in such things . I find I can never keep up. The not being able to defrag a mounted FS does sound like a weakness though it sounds like it does a decent job of keeping things up. Note though that defragging as you read files would have to produce overhead, which for some may not be desirable. I think the "correct" solution would be to support multiple file systems, but that becomes a support nightmare. Part of the reason NTFS is the official windows file system is because it is simple, users can't do crazy things with hardlinks, softlinks, and symbolic links, and then call support and ask why Word doesn't work anymore.

Originally Posted by Dreadlorde Ubuntu also have their own forums, I don't remember the link, but you can get to them from the ubuntu website.

There is http://ubuntuforums.org/ for forums, also many howtos can be found at https://help.ubuntu.com/community/. Lastly, I have never googled <anything> ubuntu and not gotten results.

Originally Posted by Dreadlorde You have a point, but isn't that what DRI is for? From what I've read about it, DRI is supposed to help rid of the overhead between the window system and the hardware. I could be wrong (and correct me if I'm wrong).

Your 100% correct, and that does eliminate some of the problem since the windows manager no longer relies on system calls to get and the hardware (for any here who haven't done systems programming, system calls=slow), What I was referring to however was the window manager communing with the kernel itself rather than the hardware. When integrated with the kernel its literally just a memory access, separated another scheme is needed, and system calls are unacceptably slow for something like a GUI. Any kind of scheme however won't be as fast as the direct memory access (not to be confused with hardware DMA ).(Linux does indeed have a scheme)
I'm not saying its wrong. It may be a better solution, as the separation would lead to a simpler GUI and a simpler kernel, each of which could probably be more easily optimized. The gains might outweigh the cost. With all the Windows haters out there though I just feel the need at times to be the voice of reason and point out that Microsoft isn't made up of total morons. Just your average morons.

Originally Posted by Dreadlorde I use awesome.

Hmm... I may have to check it out. It looks efficient, but is it as sexy as my dear enlightenment?

Originally Posted by Dreadlorde I found that with my hardware, reiserfs for my / (root) and ext2 for my /home partitons is great. I plan on trying out Btrfs and Ext4 soon though, they have a bunch of interesting features.

I am entirely unfamiliar with reiserfs, so I have no idea how it works. I wouldn't put anything critical on btrfs as it still does not have an official release. As for ext4 your right it has some nice looking features. The physical layout on the disk though is still similiar to Ext3 so I wouldn't expect any massive jumps in performance. Its a bit too new for me to have worked with much, since most of my time goes into productions environments, so I can't say anything for sure. If you do get anything amazing with it, I'd love to hear about it!

[shkm]

Just thought I'd mention that I started using awesome yesterday after about a month on wmii and I'm loving it. It's a huge upgrade from wmii, yet is also similar enough to get into easily.

I also tried stumpwm but it's aimed at emacs users, while wmii/awesome are clearly more for vimmers such as myself.

[Vyper]

Originally Posted by shkm Just thought I'd mention that I started using awesome yesterday after about a month on wmii and I'm loving it. It's a huge upgrade from wmii, yet is also similar enough to get into easily. I also tried stumpwm but it's aimed at emacs users, while wmii/awesome are clearly more for vimmers such as myself.

Heh... I've been told too many times I'm not a "real" programmer because I don't use vim. For most languages (with a few exceptions) I use Eclipse.

[shkm]

Originally Posted by Vyper Heh... I've been told too many times I'm not a "real" programmer because I don't use vim. For most languages (with a few exceptions) I use Eclipse.

To each their own; I don't understand why that wouldn't make you a "real" programmer.

Don't get me wrong--awesome isn't hardcore vim or anything, its default bindings just reflect something natural to a vim user. stumpwm, however, is very much emacsy.

[Vyper]

Originally Posted by shkm To each their own; I don't understand why that wouldn't make you a "real" programmer.

It shouldn't but some hard core Nerds/Geeks/whatever seem to feel that if your editor is too cushy, your not doing it right. Or maybe they just think whatever they use must be superior to everything else

Personally I like the XKCD take on the topic:
http://xkcd.com/378/

(Yes I'm sure this is completely on topic! Really!)