Red Dead Redemption 2 actually performs better on Linux than Windows with AMD Graphics

I tried ubuntu 20.04 yesterday,, kept having software crashes all over the place

 

Anyone with years of Linux will tell you that Ubuntu is not the best distro option 99% of the time.

I hope AMD someday incorporates the fixes and improvements of the Linux drivers on Windows, specially for OpenGL.

 

More details ...? I mean, this doesn't really help.

 

Well as im very new to linux distros i can only say that they were system software errors and i kept being asked to "report the problem"

what that problem was i have no idea

 

The good thing here is that wine has a really low overhead.
That makes moving away from window and keep playing easier.
For me that i most of the time develop and sometime games, keeping an entire windows build just to boot wow is an overkill.

 

Well, its possible, but i would like to see side by side comparision, i suspect that some effect would be missing incomplete in Linux.

 

This comes not long after the proton/contributors was able to work around the Rockstar Games Social Club (drm), which essentially made it impossible to launch the game. There are a couple of Wine builds floating around and driver fixes, but it looks like the MESA driver update was backported to 20.1.2 stable (or parts of it anyway), which is due to release on June 24th.

 

Oh wow, a game that runs better on the super light, super optimised, super open source, super worked, super disabled from telemetry and spying stuff, super hyped OS which has 3 different drivers for gaming.

That pile of trash Microsoft should just close their windows department /s

 

Give Linux mint a tickle, may be more to your persuasion.

I can't do with vanilla Ubuntu.

 

I don't see the "Windows DX12" part on either chart.

 

My Linux is not his Linux and my Windows is not his Windows so what we see is just another time wasting youtube spam without any serious meaning. Well, I didn't see it.

 

Well that's the thing: Ubuntu isn't great for experienced users, but it is a very good (not the best) option for noobs. One way Linux users push away newcomers is by leading them into a too-complicated path. Trust me, I use vanilla Arch and sometimes the minimal install of Debian, but I'd be an idiot to recommend those to someone who is trying to learn a new OS. I'm not saying that's what you're doing, but I've found that a lot of experienced users who tell noobs to avoid Ubuntu often push people into the deep end. Ubuntu is suitable for noobs; I'd say Mint is better, though.

AMD's open-source drivers are most certainly why Linux took the performance lead here. People on Windows always complain about performance and stability, but every few months, my aging R9 290 just keeps pushing away from obsolescence.

To my recollection, the bug reporter has a button to show you the complete error. I say "to my recollection" because I don't use it myself; if a program crashes, I tend to run it in the terminal since that gives me a more complete report of what went wrong.

The difference is the GPU drivers. Let's analyze Nvidia's results first:
Nvidia's drivers actually carry over a large bulk of code from Windows, plus and minus a few other binaries or application profiles. That being said, the drivers aren't really built with Linux gaming in mind. Playing Windows games on Linux requires additional CPU overhead. So, since the Nvidia drivers are overall the same (maybe worse if the Linux drivers don't have RDR2 optimizations, which they probably don't), the only possible result is par or slower performance.
As for AMD, it's totally different. The drivers are basically a fresh start and have nothing to do with the Windows drivers; the Linux driver team is a totally different set of people who basically operate independently. The drivers are built for Linux, and as such, are well-optimized. The entire open source driver stack is only a few dozen MB, so there's no bloat or old regressive code to deal with (which is why these drivers tend to be more stable than the Windows drivers). So, even though there are no [significant] application-specific optimizations, the drivers often outperform the ones in Windows, simply because they're just coded better.

And, it's worth pointing out that the CPU scheduler is very different on Linux, though for an 8700K, I don't think the difference would really matter much.

 

Unless I missed it, nobody stated a very important (obvious for linux users) thing.
This is running over WINE, not native linux. There are games with native linux versions, and they running better than their windows version is no surprise. WINE has some overhead (quite small) but it's far from perfect/finished so it's quite a feat when it manages to run a WINDOWS game on linux with better performance.

 

I alluded to wine and its overhead in my reply to ruthan, I just didn't mention it by name.

 

Linux overall is not a friendly system for novice users and PC gaming on Linux has improved but is no where ready for the average Joe. If you game on a PC and only want 60%-70% of your games to work, well Linux is for you.
There is no harm in trying out one of the many PC gaming distro's for best results if one was curious.

 

Ubuntu has not advanced much over the years, in fact it seems to have regressed. Manjaro (arch based) is probably the most polished distro I've yet tried. Everything on it just works. Love Linux sound architecture (ALSA) which I find superior to windows. Gaming still on windows, but anything music, audio, video related, Linux (esp Manjaro) now my pref. For those who still use Ubuntu, try Mint, basically a better version of Ubuntu with more polish.

 

Still haven't played this yet. I've been afraid my 1070 couldn't crank this out at 1440p so I'll definitely be getting this with the new series coming out.

 

There is only one true ricer distro!!!

https://www.shlomifish.org/humour/by-others/funroll-loops/Gentoo-is-Rice.html