-   Linux - Newbie (
-   -   3d graphics performance, Win2000 vs Linux (

qwijibow 06-18-2003 05:02 AM

3d graphics performance, Win2000 vs Linux
Hey guys...
ive heared that a linux native version of Ut2003 was released, and as this game is the only reason ive still got win2000 installed its great.

Ive bought a newish Nvidia Gforce4 64meg graphics card.

and im just wondering, how is linux's 3d graphics performance compared to that of windows, i heared linux is not big on graphics, and ill probably see a large decreace in performance.

Also. im currently running the drivers that come with the redhat 9.0 ditro.

would it be a good idea to update to the latest nvidia drivers ???

i hear some people have problems with linux and nVidia.

and when ive installed both of the files provides, how do i set linux to use these new drivers ??

ThanX to any1 who can help

neenee 06-18-2003 05:15 AM

i have a geforce2pro (gts 64MB ddr), and some months ago,
before i switched to linux, i ran windows xp. i am an avid gamer,
and have bought ut2003. i played it on windows xp, and was
forced to run in 800x600, with textures on low, world detail
on low, skin detail on low, blob shadows... i think you get the
picture; it was no pretty picture on windows xp. i was seriously
thinking of upgrading my graphics card back then. ut2003 was
not run often, and soon i uninstalled it because it did not run
well enough for me (15-25 fps). then, before i switched to linux,
gentoo produced the gentoo ut2003 live-cd. i grabbed that,
burnt it, booted with it and w00t; i was able to run ut2003 in
800x600 with 30-50-fps... this was the start of my re-try of
getting linux to work for me. i had bought suse 6.1 long ago..
but i started with getting redhat, then mandrake, i tried gentoo
but due to a malfunctioning mouse which gave problems i blamed
on software or my ignorance with linux at the time, i ended up
with mandrake 9.1. i installed ut2003, and got 30-50fps in 800x
600x32. after a few weeks i switched to slackware, on which i
get 50+ fps, sometimes up to 90 when in small maps or corridors;
open spaces often go down to 15-30 fps, but i can live with that.

in short: linux removed my need to upgrade my graphics card,
by giving me 15+fps more than windows xp gave me (i had
tweaked everything there was to tweak about windows xp; i
am not a newbie with windows, so it should be a quite fair
comparison between windows xp and linux).

as for nvidia drivers; get the latest version. the latest version comes
in the form of an easy installer; which is only one file (kernel + glx
libs). instructions are included at the download location at,
and if you still have trouble, use the search function of this fine
board, since others have gone before you and have been helped.

good luck.

DrOzz 06-18-2003 08:10 AM

well if your running a game that has been built for both linux/windows then read neenees post, but if your running a game only meant for windows through wine on linux, your performance suffers ..

contrasutra 06-18-2003 09:15 AM

I concur. :D

My performance in UT2003 (using the same card as you) went up 15 frames, with the new Nvidia drivers. Its wonderful.

And something else that I was happy about, when exiting the game, the system becomes "usable" again after 1 second, where as in Windows, it would take 15 seconds for the system to work again.

Definitly get the official nvidia drivers, because the nvidia drivers that come w/ most distros are pretty generic and might give you 2 FPS in ut2003.

Oh, by the way. The linux installer is on the third disc.

And get the latest linux patches from , it seriously helps performance.

qwijibow 06-18-2003 09:22 AM


i can install UT from disk 3... even though i bought the windows version ????

ur sh1ttin me ? i lent the game to my mate,, ill go get it back !!!

contrasutra 06-18-2003 09:36 AM

yeah, the only reason they didn't put "Runs on Linux" on the box is probobly for support reasons. They obviously dont want to deal with the numerous problems people will have with linux.

qwijibow 06-18-2003 12:05 PM

yeah, aprently it dont work on tnt-2 cards, but the windows version will, and it does not run on most AMD Athlons.. windows will.

So... why is it that windows is less hardware fussy than linux ??

lazy programmers cant be bothered... or it is the OS ?

contrasutra 06-18-2003 12:24 PM

its that the hardware manufacturers make Windows drivers, but not Linux drivers. So people have to "guess" and hack with the drivers, producing something not as solid.

But if you look at the companies that do offer linux drivers (Nvidia, Creative), you will see that they are just as good, if not better (nvidia) than their windows counterparts.

And a TNT2 wont run UT2003 at more than 10fps anyway, so it doesnt really matter.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:37 AM.