• 30p87@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    A typical Linux distro, especially lightweight and simpler ones like Arch, will of course be better than a bloated OS, like Pop or Windows. The only problem with Linux distros might be the choice of tools - X and AMD will work much better overall than Wayland and Nvidia.
    Just that many people may have an Nvidia GPU before deciding to use Linux, and some people just prefer to use Wayland over X for literally everything else.

    My PC with Wayland + Nvidia has so many problems with gaming, especially flickering and performance, while my Laptop with Wayland + integrated Intel graphics has no problems at all - even in games, that I wonder if Nvidia + Wayland still really sucks ass or if my GPU is just broken. Currently there’s a bug where frames are ‘switched’ somehow, so it’s not Frame 1, Frame 2, … Frame n, but Frame 1, Frame 3, Frame 2, Frame 5, Frame 6, Frame 4 etc.
    I expect it to be fixed by an update of nvidia in the future, but there are always such bugs.

    • TeaEarlGrayHot@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      especially flickering and performance

      If my experience is any indicator, your GPU is fine :(. Any chance you’re using mixed display scalings? I’ve got an RTX 3050 eGPU for my Plasma/Wayland laptop, and for the most part it actually works fairly smoothly (albeit more slowly compared to windows), but if I try to run a game at a higher resolution than my monitor (used by Plasma for mixed scaling) I get constant flashing/frame shifting, but when I drop it down to the native 1080p it starts working again

      As a side note, X and eGPUs do not play well together, but Wayland is literally plug and play after installing the drivers–I can even hot plug/unplug as long as nothing’s using the GPU!

      • 30p87@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        I played around with scaling a bit, but removed the commands in my sway config afterwards. I do have different screen resolutions tho.

  • li10@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’ll need to give Linux gaming another chance at some point.

    All I know is that people were saying games run great on Linux a couple of years ago as well, but when I actually tried it for myself the performance was unusable.

    Maybe that was my fault for over complicating my setup, but even when I tried a basic setup it still felt very janky.

    Not sure if anyone’s able to advise, but does RTX and variable refresh rate work on Linux?

    Those are absolute requirements for me.

    • Pantherina@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Same, I could not get a single game to run normally on Fedora Kinoite, AMD GPU, Wayland. Idk maybe amdgpu pro and x11? But xwayland should also work normally…

    • vintageballs@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      All three major GPU manufacturers support ray tracing and variable refresh rate on Linux. When playing windows games, ray tracing has to be handled through VKD3D, which AFAIK supports most but not all DXR features. I haven’t had any problems with it though.

      The one thing that can still completely make or break your (Windows games on Linux) gaming experience is anti-cheat software, since it’s up to the game developers to enable it for wine. The major anti cheat providers offer solutions for this, but not all game studios are interested in their games running on platforms other than windows. Games like valorant will probably never work. Good riddance though.

  • MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Wait, isn’t a lower frame time better? Why does their screenshot show windows having the lowest and say that it scored last?

    Looking at the source article, windows did have generally better 1% lows except for Starfield, so I think this article has it backwards. They also cherry picked 2 results where windows was worse lol.

    I’m all for pro-linux stuff but articles like this just reek of making shit up so it looks better.

    • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      They probably didn’t label their axes properly. FPS is a clearly defined metric, and there, more is better. This indicates that the conclusion (Linux is faster) holds. Since frame times have an entry with value “100” and all other values are lower, I assume that’s in percent, i.e. Arch Linux is the fastest and picked as comparison point, and the others are shown with relative performance to Arch.

      • Holzkohlen@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        It says “Prozent” in the bottom left of the screenshot. You are correct. They use percent to compare them. So more is actually better here.

  • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    Well this article is pretty disingenuous…

    1. The distribution “managed by a single person” depends on hundreds of people working on different sofware to keep up. It’s not “one person doing better than the thousands of Microsoft employees combined” implication they are pushing

    2. Windows 11 beat the linux distros by up to 20% in 1% lows which are argued as much more important by most tech reviewers. It wasn’t consistant at all which means that there was a giant margin of error.

    I love linux and linux gaming has gotten radically better, but I am tired of tech “journalism” literally just cherrypicking, misleading, clickbait trash.

    • huginn@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Not to mention the major hurdle for Linux gaming is anti cheat software being brought over. Too many games are 100% unplayable because the devs don’t allow their anticheat to be installed on Linux systems

        • interceder270@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          Client-side anti-cheat has always been a scam to offload server processing onto client machines.

          This results in worse cheat detection and wastes client resources, but companies like EA can spend less on servers.

          • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            It also doesn’t work. I know that’s what the parent comment said, but it’s a total scam at the company level too.

            “Oh, server networking is hard to do right. Let’s do it client side”

            “Oh, people are cheating. Let’s add anticheat”

            Ensue 3 years of fixing network consistency bugs and playing whackamole with cheaters

            I’ve developed games where the client is the source of truth, and games where it’s the server. It is almost always better to do anything that will be developed for more than a few weeks serverside.

            • onion@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              >client is the source of truth

              >company doesn’t like the clients truth

  • Pantherina@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eKSQT5mV-c

    Important: Nobara is way less Secure than Fedora.

    • no Secureboot
    • monthly updates instead of often daily
    • purposefully removed SELinux (because the Dev doesnt know how to use it)
    • still no Fedora39!

    If you want to game, stick to regular Fedora. A project that is actually secure is ublue with dedicated NVIDIA images that should just work and never break, and they even have Bazzite, an Image specifically for the Steamdeck but also for Desktop.

    These images are only ½ day behind upstream, apply minimal additions and patches (like drivers, codecs, packages, udev rules for controllers) and Nick from the video above found out that the Nobara patches with their weird less supported Kernel arent really worth the hassle.

      • Pantherina@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Proprietary UEFI BIOS is, but for a secure system with local manipulation prevention it can be needed. Also secureboot is a security measurement against malware so no, its simply the best we have.

        Look at Coreboot if you want a secure modern system

        • novacustom
        • 3mdeb
        • starlabs
        • system76
    • retro@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      As a non-power user, I don’t want daily updates. Monthly is perfectly fine for me.

      • Pantherina@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Then disable the updates lol. This is done in the background and includes all the security patches so you dont even see any of it, not a single popup.

        We are not talking about backported security fixes, but literally no updates for an entire month.