3 ms·

All this is true, but not really fair. Count up the issue raised by the OP, and Nvidia really has the most power to stabilize the linux desktop. I read that gam

All this is true, but not really fair. Count up the issue raised by the OP, and Nvidia really has the most power to stabilize the linux desktop. I read that gamers who want peak performance on Linux can get the proprietary Nvidia drivers running well. So it's possible, but it will never be without the friction of open source running along side signed proprietary binaries. What I would love to know is why linux isn't equal or superior to Apple and Msft in power management.

VeejayRampay 8y ago
how can it every be superior to Apple when they control the whole thing from processors to OS through hardware (and most peripherals), impossible feat
shereadsthenews 8y ago
Linux seems equal in power management to Apple. On my ThinkPad X1 Carbon with the 57 W-h battery I get a good solid 8 hours of work and often the system consumes as little as 4W. My MacBook Pro with a 54.5 W-h battery runs for at most 4 hours. Now, it's true that I had to edit dozens of little configs to get the ThinkPad with Linux up to where a ThinkPad with Windows is right out of the box, such as enabling PCIe ASPM and making it still be enabled after resume from suspend, but to my knowledge there are not such power efficiency hacks available to the user on macOS, and it's bad by default.
- wwarner 8y ago
  Thanks -- I'll have to put a bit more effort into this the next time I run a linux laptop.
- Sendotsh 8y ago
  Do you have a link to a good guide for setting up power stuff on the X1C? I've found a few but they conflict, so I'm keen to hear from someone who actually has it all working well.
- asark 8y ago
  The biggest power efficiency hack for macOS is to avoid running JS anywhere other than in Safari, and there as little as possible. Chrome and Firefox both eat battery like crazy. Firefox worse than Chrome, but either will take a couple hours off your battery life versus Safari. And running lots of heavy JS tabs or "apps" will do even worse. Not that that necessarily has anything to do with the differences you're seeing in particular, just worth noting. Wrong browser, 20-30% worse battery life. Wrong site open in some tab in the background, 30-60% worse battery life. The overwhelming majority of what takes my Mac battery life from 8+ hours to 4 or less is Javascript or some heavy Java IDE or something. User software that gives a damn about how much power it uses makes a huge difference, well outside of just "don't run video games on battery power" and other obvious stuff.
ThrowawayR2 8y ago
> Nvidia really has the most power to stabilize the linux desktop nVidia/ATI had the power to stabilize the Windows desktop too about a decade ago but didn't. (https://www.engadget.com/2008/03/27/nvidia-drivers-responsible-for-nearly-30-of-vista-crashes-in-20/ https://www.engadget.com/2008/03/27/nvidia-drivers-responsib...) IIRC, Microsoft had to move to the entirely new WDDM video driver model and its TDR mechanism (https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/display/timeout-detection-and-recovery https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/di...) to finally put an end to video driver BSODs. The odds of nVidia getting motivated enough to bring their Linux support up to par with Windows is nil.
flukus 8y ago
Anyone thinking about gaming on linux should be buying AMD and avoiding nvidia these days, there drivers are fully open source and because of that they work well out of the box and are constantly improving. > So it's possible, but it will never be without the friction of open source running along side signed proprietary binaries. AMD are proving otherwise. > What I would love to know is why linux isn't equal or superior to Apple and Msft in power management. I think it has now, my old dell laptop now get's a lot more life running ubuntu than it ever did on windows. I get 3-4 hours or more out of it and used to only get a couple under windows.

VeejayRampay 8y ago

how can it every be superior to Apple when they control the whole thing from processors to OS through hardware (and most peripherals), impossible feat

shereadsthenews 8y ago

Linux seems equal in power management to Apple. On my ThinkPad X1 Carbon with the 57 W-h battery I get a good solid 8 hours of work and often the system consumes as little as 4W. My MacBook Pro with a 54.5 W-h battery runs for at most 4 hours. Now, it's true that I had to edit dozens of little configs to get the ThinkPad with Linux up to where a ThinkPad with Windows is right out of the box, such as enabling PCIe ASPM and making it still be enabled after resume from suspend, but to my knowledge there are not such power efficiency hacks available to the user on macOS, and it's bad by default.

wwarner 8y ago
Thanks -- I'll have to put a bit more effort into this the next time I run a linux laptop.
Sendotsh 8y ago
Do you have a link to a good guide for setting up power stuff on the X1C? I've found a few but they conflict, so I'm keen to hear from someone who actually has it all working well.
asark 8y ago
The biggest power efficiency hack for macOS is to avoid running JS anywhere other than in Safari, and there as little as possible. Chrome and Firefox both eat battery like crazy. Firefox worse than Chrome, but either will take a couple hours off your battery life versus Safari. And running lots of heavy JS tabs or "apps" will do even worse. Not that that necessarily has anything to do with the differences you're seeing in particular, just worth noting. Wrong browser, 20-30% worse battery life. Wrong site open in some tab in the background, 30-60% worse battery life. The overwhelming majority of what takes my Mac battery life from 8+ hours to 4 or less is Javascript or some heavy Java IDE or something. User software that gives a damn about how much power it uses makes a huge difference, well outside of just "don't run video games on battery power" and other obvious stuff.

ThrowawayR2 8y ago

> Nvidia really has the most power to stabilize the linux desktop nVidia/ATI had the power to stabilize the Windows desktop too about a decade ago but didn't. (https://www.engadget.com/2008/03/27/nvidia-drivers-responsible-for-nearly-30-of-vista-crashes-in-20/ https://www.engadget.com/2008/03/27/nvidia-drivers-responsib...) IIRC, Microsoft had to move to the entirely new WDDM video driver model and its TDR mechanism (https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/display/timeout-detection-and-recovery https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/di...) to finally put an end to video driver BSODs. The odds of nVidia getting motivated enough to bring their Linux support up to par with Windows is nil.

flukus 8y ago

Anyone thinking about gaming on linux should be buying AMD and avoiding nvidia these days, there drivers are fully open source and because of that they work well out of the box and are constantly improving. > So it's possible, but it will never be without the friction of open source running along side signed proprietary binaries. AMD are proving otherwise. > What I would love to know is why linux isn't equal or superior to Apple and Msft in power management. I think it has now, my old dell laptop now get's a lot more life running ubuntu than it ever did on windows. I get 3-4 hours or more out of it and used to only get a couple under windows.