3 ms·

>I don't think there's anything about Windows that would fundamentally change things here. Windows apps aren't shipping their own graphics drivers, even if they

>I don't think there's anything about Windows that would fundamentally change things here. Windows apps aren't shipping their own graphics drivers, even if they're bundling everything else. Over on Windows, GPU drivers are provided and distributed by the manufacturer, Microsoft themselves might also distribute them through Windows Update. GPU manufacturers also work together with Microsoft and bigger game dev studios (read: studios with sufficient cash/influence) to make sure everything works well together. The drivers are also signed off by Microsoft, both figuratively and literally. Linux has none of this. Drivers are provided primarily by volunteers (most of whom couldn't care less about proprietary code), packaged and distributed by each distro, and most game devs couldn't care less about issues concerning less than one percent of their customers.

pedrocr 4y ago
Getting consistent quality out of Linux drivers is usually much easier than Windows ones exactly because they're not supplied by a random hardware maker but are almost all upstream in the kernel. GPU drivers used to be a nightmare for this exact reason and are now finally all becoming properly upstream. Meanwhile the horror stories about Windows GPU drivers are all too common. Having to "clean up" old drivers. Having to stay on older versions because the new ones have a relevant broken feature, etc.
- zamnos 4y ago
  Let's be real, the two contenders for GPU performance (which, gamers appreciate) are Nvidia, which is not in the kernel, and AMD, which has an in-kernel driver, plus their own proprietary driver, same as Nvidia. TF2 is old enough that its runnable even on old Intel hardware, but let's not pretend that "almost all [drivers are] upstream in the kernel", so long as Nvidia and AMD both have proprietary, out-of-kernel-tree drivers, which mean that the "windows GPU horror stories" are also Linux GPU driver horror stories. Having to "clean up" old drivers. Having to stay on older versions because the new ones have a relevant broken feature, or the best: staying on an older version because the newer one doesn't support your hardware. I've spent way too long on Nvidia's legacy unix driver page[1], but only Nvidia cards have Cuda support, or the performance, so I'm stuck there. [1] https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/drivers/unix/ https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/drivers/unix/
  - nemetroid 4y ago
    The proprietary AMD driver (AMDGPU-PRO) is only needed (or even an improvement over the open source version) in a few niche use cases. The majority of users are better off using the open source driver. > These days our packaged drivers are mostly intended for: > - customers using slower moving enterprise/LTS distros which do not automatically pick up the latest graphics drivers - we offer them both open source and proprietary/workstation options > - customers using workstation apps who need the extra performance/certification from a workstation-oriented driver (although Marek has done a lot of great work over the last year to improve Mesa performance on workstation apps) > The third target audience is customers looking for ready-to-go OpenCL, either for use with the packaged open/closed drivers or with the upstream-based stack in a recent distro. https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/linux-graphics-x-org-drivers/open-source-amd-linux/1316628-radeon-software-for-linux-22-10-driver-being-prepared-for-release#post1316713 https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/linux-graphics-x-org-d...
  - pedrocr 4y ago
    GPU drivers are notorious for being out of tree and even there most GPU drivers over the years have been upstream. Even if you limit to just GPUs AMD are not the same as Nvidia. The in-kernel AMD driver is the primary one these days and even Nvidia has finally relented and is finally helping move at least the kernel driver upstream. That Nvidia's closed-source driver has been a mess for all these years is just a further example of how the Linux model is much superior to the Windows one.

pedrocr 4y ago

Getting consistent quality out of Linux drivers is usually much easier than Windows ones exactly because they're not supplied by a random hardware maker but are almost all upstream in the kernel. GPU drivers used to be a nightmare for this exact reason and are now finally all becoming properly upstream. Meanwhile the horror stories about Windows GPU drivers are all too common. Having to "clean up" old drivers. Having to stay on older versions because the new ones have a relevant broken feature, etc.

zamnos 4y ago
Let's be real, the two contenders for GPU performance (which, gamers appreciate) are Nvidia, which is not in the kernel, and AMD, which has an in-kernel driver, plus their own proprietary driver, same as Nvidia. TF2 is old enough that its runnable even on old Intel hardware, but let's not pretend that "almost all [drivers are] upstream in the kernel", so long as Nvidia and AMD both have proprietary, out-of-kernel-tree drivers, which mean that the "windows GPU horror stories" are also Linux GPU driver horror stories. Having to "clean up" old drivers. Having to stay on older versions because the new ones have a relevant broken feature, or the best: staying on an older version because the newer one doesn't support your hardware. I've spent way too long on Nvidia's legacy unix driver page[1], but only Nvidia cards have Cuda support, or the performance, so I'm stuck there. [1] https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/drivers/unix/ https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/drivers/unix/
- nemetroid 4y ago
  The proprietary AMD driver (AMDGPU-PRO) is only needed (or even an improvement over the open source version) in a few niche use cases. The majority of users are better off using the open source driver. > These days our packaged drivers are mostly intended for: > - customers using slower moving enterprise/LTS distros which do not automatically pick up the latest graphics drivers - we offer them both open source and proprietary/workstation options > - customers using workstation apps who need the extra performance/certification from a workstation-oriented driver (although Marek has done a lot of great work over the last year to improve Mesa performance on workstation apps) > The third target audience is customers looking for ready-to-go OpenCL, either for use with the packaged open/closed drivers or with the upstream-based stack in a recent distro. https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/linux-graphics-x-org-drivers/open-source-amd-linux/1316628-radeon-software-for-linux-22-10-driver-being-prepared-for-release#post1316713 https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/linux-graphics-x-org-d...
- pedrocr 4y ago
  GPU drivers are notorious for being out of tree and even there most GPU drivers over the years have been upstream. Even if you limit to just GPUs AMD are not the same as Nvidia. The in-kernel AMD driver is the primary one these days and even Nvidia has finally relented and is finally helping move at least the kernel driver upstream. That Nvidia's closed-source driver has been a mess for all these years is just a further example of how the Linux model is much superior to the Windows one.