Comment by tuetuopay | Hacker News Reader

Comment by tuetuopay | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

AFAIK this comes down a lot to NVIDIA not doing enough efforts for the Linux drivers. There is a pretty well documented and understood reason for the perf hit NVIDIA GPUs get on Linux.

Honestly, considering where we came from, a 10-30% perf drop is good and is a reasonable tradeoff to consider. Especially for all the people that don't want to touch Windows 11 with a 11-foot pole (which I am), it's a more than decent path. I can reboot into my unsupported Win10 install if I really need the frames.

Really, Linux benchmarks need to be split between AMD and NVIDIA. Both are useful, as the "just buy an amd card lol" crowd is ignoring the actually large NVIDIA install base, and it's not like I'm gonna swap out my RTX 3090 to go Linux.

Thanks for the comparison! Would you have an apples to apples, or rather an NVIDIA to NVIDIA comparison instead of "across the board"? I'd suspect the numbers are worse for the pure NVIDIA comparison, for what I mentioned above.

To each their own, but Windows 11 runs flawlessly on my machine with high-end specs and a 240 Hz monitor.

The Start menu works great with no lag, even immediately after booting.

The only thing that I consider annoying would be the 'Setup' screens that sometimes show up after bigger updates.

---

Would I trade it all to get on Bazzite DX:

- lower game compatibility and potential bugs

- subpar NVIDIA drivers with the risk of performance degradation

- restricted development in dev containers relying on VS Code Remote

- Loss of the Backblaze Unlimited plan

+ system rollbacks if an update fails

---

That does not seem worth it to me.

The start menu worked 30 years ago on a 32mb of RAM and a box of scraps.

Considering I found the win10 start menu too slow, the w11 one does not stand a chance. But I'm hopeful from your comment, it shows that w11 is not the complete shitshow people make it to be, though the few times I used it on relatives computers I found it not responsive enough.

I'm testing daily-drive on my main rig (high-end from a few years ago, 5900x + 3090), and honestly I'm rediscovering my computer. A combination of less fluff, less animations, better fs performance (NTFS on NVMe is suboptimal), etc. I was getting fed up by a few windows quirks: weird updates breaking stuff, weird audio issues (e.g. the audio subsystem getting ~10s latency for any interaction like playing a new media file or opening the output switcher), weird display issues (computer locking up when powering on/off my 4k tv), and whatnot. I'm still keeping the w10 install around, as having an unsupported OS is less of a problem for the occasional game, especially since I mostly play offline games.

As for the dev env, you're not limited to bazzite, I run Arch. Well, I've been running it for two weeks on the rig. But you really get the best devex with linux.

The start menu seems to respond instantly for me.

That's on a 7950X3D with 64 GB RAM and a Samsung 990 Pro SSD. Maybe it performs worse on slower hardware.

I have 14 TB of SSDs connected, so it's not like there is no content on my PC.

Notably I don't have any HDDs connected, maybe that plays a role here.

The few win11 I've touched were all on NVMe drives, but I'm pretty sure they're fast enough for a start menu. I mean, your gear should not be needed to get a responsive start menu.

I'm curious, did you clean up what's by default in the start menu? Stuff like "recommended", "candy crush", and the likes? On the win11 I tested, those parts loaded slower than the rest, I wonder if the start menu has a timeout of "load then open".

Had I switched to win11 I'd have slapped Classic Shell on it, as I did on win10. It's a reimplementation of the win7 start menu with windows-version-appropriate design, but with win7 reactivity (opens literally the next frame, in no small parts thanks to the absence of animation).

After checking the responsiveness of the start menu earlier, I uninstalled or unpinned the useless stuff in Pinned.

I don't think it made a difference, it was already lag free before.

It's annoying they put Office Copilot and Instagram there, but it uninstalled with just two clicks per item, taking a minute or so to get rid of everything.

> The Start menu works great with no lag, even immediately after booting.

The very fact that this has to be explicitly mentioned is laughable.

Like $100 Chinese phones can achieve the same, this is the bare basic for a modern system capable of running 240Hz monitor (I assume it can do so with most games).

The start menu bug is one of the few problems that windows has, compare that to Linux.

>a 10-30% perf drop is good and is a reasonable tradeoff to consider

You are either trolling or completely out of your mind. You simply cannot be serious when saying stuff like this.

I'm not. The situation is improving rapidly, and I'd expect the gap to close soon.

I still have the windows install. And with an RTX 3090, framerate is not that much of a consideration for most games, especially since my main monitor is "only" 1440p, albeit a 144Hz one.

Couple that with GSync, framerate fluctuations is not really noticeable. Gone are the days where dipping below 60Hz is a no-no. The most important metric is stutter and 1% lows, those will really affect the feeling of your game. My TV is 120Hz with GSync too, and couch games with a controller are much less sensitive to framerate.

Do I leave performance on the table? Surely. Do I care? In the short term, no. The last GPU intensive games I played are Hogwarts Legacy and Satisfactory, both of which can take a hit (satisfactory does not max the GPU, and Hogwarts can suffer DLSS). The next intensive game I plan on playing is GTA VI, and by this time I'd fully expect the perf gap to have closed. And the game to play fine, given how Rockstar puts care on how the performance of their games, more so with the Gabe Cube being an actual target.

In the long run, I agree this is not a "happy" compromise. I paid for that hardware dammit. But the NVIDIA situation will be solved by the time I buy a new GPU: either they completely drop out of the gaming business to focus on AI, or they fix their shit because Linux will be an actual gaming market and they can't keep giving the finger to the penguin.

It’s reasonable to consider. If a title runs at 80FPS on Windows, it’ll be completely playable on Linux. Framerate isn’t everything.

It's perfectly reasonable. I actually run my Nvidia card at a 30% underclock so it works out fine for me on Linux.

Is it really crazy? Some stuff runs faster and some runs slower, and I deal with less bullshit. I was already running with 17-20% reduced power limits anyway.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com