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

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Jun 19, 2020.

  1. anticupidon

    anticupidon Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,936
    Likes Received:
    2,348
    GPU:
    Polaris/Vega/Navi
    Running encrypted Luks volume with btrfs and time shift snapshots of flavored Arch.
    I see where you are coming from
     
  2. PrMinisterGR

    PrMinisterGR Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,735
    Likes Received:
    651
    GPU:
    Inno3D RTX 3090
    I generally dislike time shift, probably because I was used to Snapper early on. Still, Linux on the desktop is slower in 2D than Windows is, unless you use completely primitive stuff, and there are a lot of issues with proper HiDPI scaling. It's also lacking support for HDR, and due to licensing issues it will probably never get something like Atmos or DTS:X. This is unfortunate, but kind of by design.

    I bet that at the end of his career as the Microsoft CEO, Nadella will take the plunge and clean up the source of Windows and open source a version without all the pre-10 cruft.
     
  3. anticupidon

    anticupidon Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,936
    Likes Received:
    2,348
    GPU:
    Polaris/Vega/Navi
    For some users, the OS is rather trivial. Our system administration teacher told us that our goal is to understand ALL system to the core, and become OS agnostic.
     
    schmidtbag and ManofGod like this.
  4. anticupidon

    anticupidon Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,936
    Likes Received:
    2,348
    GPU:
    Polaris/Vega/Navi
    Snapper also is on my list, no wory. More tools, the better.
    Let's hope that Wayland will gain more traction and we can retire X.org. Wishful thinking.:rolleyes:
    That Linux desktop hasn't all the bell and whistles- that's a tradeoff I can make.
     

  5. PrMinisterGR

    PrMinisterGR Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,735
    Likes Received:
    651
    GPU:
    Inno3D RTX 3090
    For work is perfect, and if it could work for other things properly, the concept of the Steam Machine that Valve had was sound, but they would have had to heavily commit on the kernel, and to improve whatever toolkit/DE they decided to use.

    Right now most of them are stable, but slow.
     
  6. ManofGod

    ManofGod Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,504
    Likes Received:
    73
    GPU:
    Sapphire R9 Fury Nitro
    I have never noticed it being slower than 2D on the very same computer. Of course, I run 144hz monitors and would never, by choice, go back to 60hz again.
     
  7. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    2,288
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    Well you said it correctly - it's "fine" for highly experienced users. It's not bad, but most experienced users are held back by it. Ubuntu likes to do things downstream, for their own purposes (in the context of gaming, this is one of the key reasons why Valve ditched Ubuntu as the default). Their release cycle is either annoying to keep up with or not very up-to-date; there's no in-between. It's rather bloated and makes a lot of assumptions about what you want installed and how you want things configured. Most Linux power users would rather go with something that complies more with Linux standards and does what they want it to do and not what Canonical thinks is best.
    Obviously, Canonical isn't stupid. If it weren't for them, Linux would not be where it is today. I learned Linux through Ubuntu. But I found myself "graduating" from it, and at times it can be frustrating to look back.
    So, I'm not telling people what to use, but rather, I'm saying there are valid reasons why experienced users don't use Ubuntu.


    I've ditched Windows for my gaming PC for about 2 full years now. Most of the time, the performance is just fine.
    I'm curious where your 2D performance would be suffering in a way that's actually noticeable? IIRC, much of the 2D-specific stack seems to have been abandoned in favor of just using 3D calls instead. It's less efficient but typically it doesn't cause any significant performance impact.
     
    HandR likes this.
  8. ManofGod

    ManofGod Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,504
    Likes Received:
    73
    GPU:
    Sapphire R9 Fury Nitro
    I do not agree, Ubuntu is not holding back highly experienced users at all. I also do not see any assumptions being made or at least no more than any other OS, including Arch. It seems to me that you are implying that Linux power users should all be using Gentoo, since even Arch assumes a lot of things. As for gaming, Ubuntu 20.04.2 seems to be the best and it works extremely well for me. None of the other distro's worked as well as Ubuntu 20.04.2, including the so called gaming centric distro's, which really aren't. (I tried those out and they worked quite a bit worse.)

    Edit: On the subject of this thread, 1.5 years after release and I still cannot run RDR2 Rockstar version on Linux. It is getting closer but still not there and I am not going to buy the game again in Steam, oh well.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2021
  9. Merlena

    Merlena Active Member

    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    7
    GPU:
    RTX 3070 8G
    It's all personal preference, and even if it did run better on Linux. Because it does run better with Vulkan on Windows 10. However, DirectX12 render still looks better. DX12 seems to have a smoother approach with the engine TAA. You could try some sharpening with Vulkan, but it still doesn't look as good.
     
  10. Passus

    Passus Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,745
    Likes Received:
    519
    GPU:
    RX 5700 Mech OC
    I had to temporarily go to a 60hz screen after i broke a 144hz one, hurt my eyes so much that if i hadnt had the money for a new screen i just would not have used the pc lol
     
    cucaulay malkin and ManofGod like this.

  11. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    2,288
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    You are akin to a Mac OS power user - the only reason you're not held back is because you align with the design choices you're stuck with. That's fine - I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. But, it puts you in a bit of an isolated bubble. If you really aren't held back, that's probably because you're either:
    A. Staying within Canonical's ecosystem wherever possible.
    B. Using flatpaks, which are inherently beneficial in that they avoid some of the downstream issues Ubuntu has.
    C. You use things like Lutris or PlayOnLinux to get your games working, which can step around some of Canonical's design differences.
    D. Much like any power-user of any distro or OS, you know the quirks well enough to work around them. So, when you claim a gaming centric distro works worse, it probably doesn't (especially if it's Ubuntu based, which in most cases, it probably is) but it isn't set up the same way, so you don't know what you're looking for.

    And no, I'm not some Linux elitist. I'm not suggesting all power users use Gentoo or Arch. Ubuntu (and Mac OS, for that matter) need power users in order for it to continue development. There are plenty of other "simpler" distros that are appealing to power users such as SUSe, Fedora, or Mageia. Note how I didn't mention Debian, because even though that's my go-to distro for getting something set up quickly, they break things quite often where unlike Ubuntu, they don't command a marketshare to get away with it.
    Also, Arch doesn't make a lot of assumptions. It tries to use default configurations wherever possible and will use some minor tweaks here and there to ensure compatibility (since unlike Ubuntu, Arch devs avoid using downstream patches). Arch has grown a bit more aggressive when it comes to recommending packages, though, and they really screwed with the directory structure in, IMO, an unnecessary way.
    I see Gentoo more as a tool than an actual OS. Nowadays, the pros don't outweigh the cons for normal use.
    Seems others have got it to work (maybe I should retract my statement about assuming you use Lutris):
    https://lutris.net/games/red-dead-redemption-ii/
     
    PrMinisterGR likes this.
  12. ManofGod

    ManofGod Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,504
    Likes Received:
    73
    GPU:
    Sapphire R9 Fury Nitro
    I am not stuck with anything, I have chosen what I want to use and I use it in that way, unlike a Mac user. Also, Lutris is a straight up program to use on all distributions, not just Ubuntu and of course I am using Lutris, since I do not have the steam version of RDR2. As for breaking things, nothing on my 3 installs of LTS 20.04.2 have broken so, I would say that your take, while not elitist, is misguided, at best and down right limited, at worst. I have used Suse, Fedora as well as Manjaro, Endeavour and other distributions, such as Mandrake and Slackware but, Ubuntu 20.04.2 appears to be the best, at least for me.
     
  13. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    2,288
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    You're not getting my point... you aren't stuck because you're fine with your choice. People don't tend to complain about the product they're using when they chose it and have no interest in the alternatives. You have no need to step outside of the Ubuntu bubble and the downsides don't affect you, so you don't see a reason to switch. But remember, the whole reason we're having this discussion is because you're inserting your opinions as a counter-argument, when it is nothing more than an anecdote.
    Also, seems rather closed-minded and ignorant of you to imply Mac power users are stuck with what they have, because if you understood my point, you'd realize that they too chose their system deliberately and don't care or aren't affected by the negatives. That's totally fine - you do you. That's why for this whole time, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with you using Ubuntu. But you're in the minority of power users who prefer it.
    I'm aware Lutris exists on other distros... you again aren't understanding my point. What makes Lutris great is the fact it circumvents many distro-specific problems. Many of the runners do the configuration for you or set up binaries for you that are specific to that game, where you don't need to worry about installing dependencies or whether your version/configuration is going to screw with it. Lutris is common for Ubuntu users because Ubuntu (for better and worse) has a tendency to meddle with things that can affect game compatibility. The ironic thing is, many runners are built on Ubuntu by default, so that the Ubuntu-specific builds can work on other distros. Same concept with flatpaks.
    Anyway, you can always modify the Steam runner to work for your needs.
    Again, just because you aren't affected by Ubuntu's decisions, doesn't mean most other Linux power users aren't. You're acting way too much like your perspective is the only one. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with power users sticking with Ubuntu, I'm telling you that the matter of fact is, most don't. The reason you feel those other distros aren't better is because you're conditioned to like the way Ubuntu does things. That's fine, but Canonical goes against the grain. Remember, even the paid/corporate distros of Linux are part of a greater community. Ubuntu, from what I can tell, is more of a loner than a contributor. They open source their work, which is great, but it's for their interests and it's typically not submitted (let alone accepted) upstream. If someone like yourself doesn't have a reason to leave Canonical's bubble, then yeah, you're going to be fine with them and have no reason to leave. For everyone else, it's a nuisance.
    Despite everything I'm saying, it's not like Canonical is malicious, but many people like myself are fed up with them because they keep doing things their own way and abandoning much of their efforts when they could have been contributing to the community as a whole and make a better experience for everyone. Wayland could have been widely adopted by now if Canonical didn't waste everyone's time with Mir. GNOME would be the most polished desktop environment if Canonical didn't make a fork with Unity. systemd would likely be less hated if Canonical had an early influence on that rather than Upstart. It's their right and freedom to work on these projects, but people grow irritated when Canonical has the resources to work with others and deliberately choose not to, with nothing to show for it.
     
    yasamoka likes this.
  14. ManofGod

    ManofGod Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,504
    Likes Received:
    73
    GPU:
    Sapphire R9 Fury Nitro
    The reasons we are having an argument is because you are interjecting your opinions as fact but hey....... As for having no interest in using other OSes, I am an IT professional and have been using other OSes for the past 30 years. I am getting your exact point and I am saying you are straight up wrong. I have no issue with anyone using what they want but I do have issues with so called power users manipulating, intentionally or not, to get those other power users who do not think as they do to think as they do, nothing more and nothing less.

    Oh, and I do not "feel" anything, I use the OS I use because of objective, factual, logical reasoning, nothing more and nothing less. I have used so many OSes that most power users are not even willing to try but hey, claim that I am stuck because I do not chose as you think I ought, that is simply the way it is. As for Wayland, that has a long, long way to go, with or without Mir. I do not work in a bubble, I work with what works, not what those who think I should do otherwise think I should do. As for Lutris, it is built to make things easier and better, although it is still no steam.

    Edit: In my opinion, it is like I have been outside all bubbles looking into those bubbles and they are claiming that I am the one in a bubble. I have never been tied down to one OS in my 31 plus years of computing, I just use what I want when I want because it works.

    Thankfully, I use Ubuntu Linux because and Linux in general, as my daily driver, because of objective, factual local privacy and security. If I where to base that usage on what others think I should or should not use or attempt to define my usage based upon their own assumptions and opinions, I would probably never stick around long enough to enjoy much of anything.

    Edit 2: In fact, I have the latest version of Wine installed, I tried installing the launcher directly but, I could not even do so, it just froze and became unresponsive. The biggest thing with Lutris, for any of the distributions, is that it will install what you need and the way you need it, without having to check every line of code or other such stuff.

    Edit 3: Oh, and I preferred Unity, which I find to be much better than the older version so GNome. As for KDE, why would I want my computer to look and act like Windows XP or 7 when I prefer to try different things?
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2021
  15. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    2,288
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    That's because it's not a matter of opinion, it's fact. Most highly experienced users don't use Ubuntu (they may have at one point) for the reasons I already mentioned. You're acting like most=all. Ubuntu, Mint, and perhaps Pop_OS! (all of which are related) are the primary "noob friendly" distros still in development. Those 3 are also of the most popular distros, but collectively, they still don't make up the majority of users.
    You haven't established anything about how you think I'm wrong other than "I'm a power user and use Ubuntu" which means nothing. I'm not saying power users don't use Ubuntu, I'm saying most don't, which is a fact when you consider the size of alternative communities.
    I'm not sure if you're insinuating that I'm trying to manipulate anyone, but I'm not sure where you're getting that from.
    Yes, you do "feel" it, because otherwise you wouldn't be over-reacting to everything I say and making rash assumptions. If you were truly rational, I wouldn't have to explain to you why most power users don't stick with Ubuntu, and you wouldn't feel the need to "correct" me over an anecdote. You're free to not align with what other power users think, but that doesn't make me wrong.
    How do you not see my point about Wayland? It wouldn't have a "long, long" or even "long" way to go if Canonical didn't bother with Mir. Ubuntu has a massive userbase, with thousands of power users and highly skilled developers. They, in conjunction with everyone else who contributed toward Wayland, would have brought it to its current state several years sooner. It's not just the fact that Canonical didn't contribute to Wayland, but they diverted attention away from it, so it's more detrimental than you think. The time they spent building Mir would have achieved more if it was spent on Wayland instead.
    If you deliberately choose Ubuntu, you work in a bubble whether you think you do or not. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but for better or worse, Ubuntu is known for not cooperating with the community.
    Lutris isn't meant to be Steam... That's an apples to oranges comparison.
    I meant you're in a bubble relative to other Linux distros. For you, sticking with Ubuntu "because it works" is precisely what puts you in a bubble, because for most other power users, the differences of Ubuntu make it a hindrance, thanks to all their downstream changes. That's a 2-way street though, because Ubuntu's downstream changes and popularity is what makes it an ideal choice if commercial software is a high priority to you, because many closed-source programs are built using those downstream libraries. That in turn causes compatibility issues with pretty much everyone else, hence it being a nuisance to the rest of the Linux community. I can't stress this enough: Linux depends on a community to thrive. Ubuntu has its own community, but the Ubuntu community often (not always...) doesn't cooperate/share with others.
    I didn't bother checking the RDR2 runner but typically, you want to use the version of Wine the runner provides, not the newest one. Ubuntu's downstream changes to Wine is often the primary reason for this.
    You shouldn't have to check every line of code either. All you should have to do is tell it to skip the step involving Steam, since I'm guessing RDR2 uses Rockstar's own DRM regardless of whether Steam is installed. C'mon, you're a power user, right?
    Oh god no, you're of those people...
    Y'know you don't have to stick with the default themes, right? Also, when was the last time you even tried KDE? The "Windows XP" look hasn't been a problem for like 3 or 4 years. It boggles my mind why people turn down a highly user-configurable interface because of a default theme, totally ignoring everything else. I found it absurd even when people turn down Ubuntu "because I don't like orange or purple". It's so effortless to change such a thing. Says a lot about superficiality.
     
    yasamoka likes this.

  16. ManofGod

    ManofGod Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,504
    Likes Received:
    73
    GPU:
    Sapphire R9 Fury Nitro
    You go one with you ignorance and I will go on with what you believe is mine, have fun trying to convince others of doing things they way you think they should. I have been using Linux since Slackware in 1996 so, I would say I possibly have more experience than you do, nothing more and nothing less. Also, you keep living in your bubble and I will keep moving on and using what works best for me, which is neither in a bubble nor limited in any fashion that I use the OS for.

    LOL! Work in a bubble, if you say so, I guess. :D Edit: Or as said in my proper southern accent: I have been keeping up and trying all the DE's over the last 25 years. You want things to be like Windows 7 and below, good for you but, I do not, because if I did, I would simply use that instead.
     
  17. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    2,288
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    Says the one who:
    A. Judges desktop environments by their default appearance.
    B. Makes rash assumptions about what I said.
    C. Has no contrarian evidence to back up claims.
    Oh the irony...
    What bubble do you think I'm living in? I'm not saying you're wrong, because I am in fact in a bubble, as is everyone who has a favorite distro. But my bubble is clumped up with others; others that work as a community, whereas Ubuntu has their own isolated bubble/community (again, that's not necessarily a bad thing, depending on your priorities). At least I'm not the one in denial with an inferiority complex. I couldn't care less what distro you use. If Ubuntu makes you happy, great - who am I to tell you that's wrong? You've been more judgmental of what others use than I have. I'm just stating facts, which apparently offend you.
    Yeah... you're losing a lot of credibility there in that statement. Even back when KDE 3 was modern, it had more features than Windows 7. It's apparent you've never tried it, because you judge a book by its covers.
    Note how I never stated my preferred environment; I never even said anything bad about Unity, other than it was an abandoned distraction from GNOME (which doesn't mean anything about it as an interface, which is good in its own way). Again, seems to me you're the only one being judgmental about what others prefer.
     
    yasamoka likes this.
  18. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,810
    Likes Received:
    3,363
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    I used to like KDE, but for many years now, I prefer XFCE w/ lightdm on fedora.
    One thing I do really dislike is Gnome. Sure, it can make "experience" closer to windows in some ways, but it is more unpleasant to deal with than windows itself.
    KDE/XFCE, one can customize everything nicely.

    What I see as funny is that linux can be too much to swallow for beginners. Over 20 years ago, when internet was still slow here, one could get Debian/SuSE/... on CDs. My 1st install of SLES was like: "Way too many CDs for one OS." And UI was way it was back then.
    Today, anyone interested can just query google image search and pick what looks most natural to them visually. And then it is easy to ignore distribution itself. There are visual interfaces for package installations.
    Distros focused on general population actually make things easier than installing things on windows. Just few clicks in built-in package manager and software is installed.

    And as far as all features supported go. For GCN and newer. Yes. For GPUs before GCN. No. (1st hand experience with mobility HD 5870. But outside of some features not being implemented, proton makes gaming as easy as it can be.)
    = = = =
    @anticupidon : Ubuntu unnecessarily complicates package management via command line. It is unnecessary wall for beginners. I think that even people who put it together prefer to use visual package manager. And if someone is unlucky enough to get pointed towards default Gnome flavor...
    Actually I think that big fragmentation in use of rpm/dpkg/apt pacman/yum/...is biggest problem for new users in linux. If they get advanced enough to start using terminal for comfort, they can run into unpleasant surprise as their previously obtained knowledge is practically worthless on other distro. And that can discourage people more than actual need to learn things for 1st time.
    Back in the day, we had quite differently thinking teacher. Most important lesson was that if user of any system can break such system, it is not his fault. It is fault of system administrator who gave him sufficient privileges/permissions to break anything.
    With windows, I never been in situation where domain managed user account could not get elevated prompt through exploit crafted locally (without need to download some "hacking" tool = just what's available via basic installation). Securing Windows Domain is not easy task. And those who think they managed to do it are most likely wrong. In case regular user manages to elevate himself to SYSTEM, admin should consider changing job.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2021
  19. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    2,288
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    I find it a little weird you'd switch now. KDE within the past year has been the most polished it's ever been. Seems like every week there are noteworthy improvements and bug fixes.
    XFCE and Budgie are my go-to for lightweight systems though. I used to like LXQt but Qt updates break it too easily.
    I think Microsoft has realized that Mac and Linux have an easier way to go about installing things, and may be one of the primary reasons they created the Windows Store.
    Can you elaborate? I don't really understand how it can be unnecessarily complicated, when using the CLI for package management is mostly optional. Since you're singling-out Ubuntu, I'm curious what you think is less complicated.
    Yes, I agree with this 100%. For experienced users, package management largely becomes irrelevant, but then gremlins like how downstream patches to glibc or the kernel appear.
    Smart teacher. This also ties into the myth that *nix OSes would be less secure than Windows if they were as popular.
     
  20. PrMinisterGR

    PrMinisterGR Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,735
    Likes Received:
    651
    GPU:
    Inno3D RTX 3090
    @Fox2232 interestingly enough, I would say that KDE is much closer to Windows than Gnome. Gnome is also a ton better and more reasonable out of the box. It took quite a bit of time to customize KDE to my liking, but now it's fine, even better even.
     

Share This Page