Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 2nd Aug 2012 16:48 UTC, submitted by aargh
Games From Valve's Linux blog: "That the Linux version runs faster than the Windows version (270.6) seems a little counter-intuitive, given the greater amount of time we have spent on the Windows version. However, it does speak to the underlying efficiency of the kernel and OpenGL." If it wasn't obvious before, it should be now: Valve has started its marketing campaign for Linux. With the Windows platform in the process of closing itself off, Valve has to look to greener pastures. This is all to motive third parties to get their stuff ready for a possible Linux-powered 'Steambox' - not a console, but a set of generic PC specifications. Remember: the Xbox is the only machine tied to DirectX - OpenGL runs everywhere else, including Windows (the PS3 is an oddball, and has a sort-of Sony-specific FrankenOpenGL). OpenGL simply makes more sense for developers, and now Valve is working very closely with Nvidia, AMD, and Intel to optimise their Linux drivers. Do the math, people.
Permalink for comment 529375
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Not too fast
by fretinator on Thu 2nd Aug 2012 17:51 UTC
Member since:

I am glad to hear OpenGL/Linux is faster that Windows/DirectX. However, a lot of Devs will only code for Windows. The question is (and maybe I missed it) is - is OpenGL/Windows faster than DirectX/Windows? A secondary question is how hard it is to code OpenGL for Windows Devs.

If DirectX is still faster than OpenGL on Windows, there won't be a mass exodus. In addition, if OpenGL isn't somewhat easy for Windows Devs using Visual Studio and Microsoft libraries, they will continue using what they have.

The bottom line, is once someone can convince Windows devs to use OpenGL, a good part of the battle is over.

Reply Score: 3