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.
Thread beginning with comment 529748
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[15]: Comment by lucas_maximus
by ichi on Sun 5th Aug 2012 13:14 UTC in reply to "RE[14]: Comment by lucas_maximus"
Member since:

I am not saying that, I am just saying that the test is not entirely fair to Windows and Modern Direct X.

Linux advocates will be quoting that blog post for the next ten years.

The test is just a comparison between a final released product and an under development port. How is it not fair? I mean, it's not a competition between Linux and Ẃindows, those are just the specific performance results for a specific product.

It seems completely fair to me that Valve wants to compare the work so far on the Linux port with the performance of their final product on other platform, since that should be the level of performance they would be targeting.

It just so happens that they managed to get better performance on Linux and their findings helped them to squeeze some extra FPS on the Windows version with OpenGL, and they also found a problem with DirectX that they'll now try to mitigate.
They wrote a blog article about that and for some reason some people went all butthurt about the supposed unfairness of the results they got.

If Linux advocates wanted something to brag about they could just cherry pick Unigine were Ubuntu 11.10 beats DirectX 11 in two of the three available benchmarks.

Reply Parent Score: 3

lucas_maximus Member since:

Tbh, I wasn't that butt hurt about it.

I just wanted to make sure before everyone said "Windows lol" ... that I said, Direct X 9 is slow because of the following reasons.

Nth Man ended up being butthurt about the fact that I think there is a bit of agenda behind it.

But whatever, this is neo-slashdot. It all gets outta hand very quickly.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Nth_Man Member since:

Maybe there is a bit of agenda, maybe not. I didn't say otherwise.

> Nth Man ended up being butthurt about the fact that I think
> there is a bit of agenda behind it.
That is simply not true. Stop telling false things about me
and if you want to call someone "being butthurt", call it yourself.

Not to repeat myself: this is what I was talking about:

Edited 2012-08-07 09:05 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2