Cyberpunk 2077 2.0 Update: Phantom Liberty performance tested across Windows and Nobara OS.Video Timeline:00:00 - In Game Settings on Windows 11.00:33 - In G...
The YouTube channel "Maximum Fury" conducted a technical test of the new Cyberpunk add-on called "Phantom Liberty" on an older AMD hardware system, testing it separately on Linux and Windows 11. The Linux system, specifically the Fedora distribution called Nobara, performed significantly better, delivering 31% more frames compared to Windows 11.
The hardware used for testing included an Asrock B550 motherboard with an AMD Ryzen 5 5600 CPU and an AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT GPU from the first RDNA generation, along with 16 GB of DDR4 RAM. The CPU, RAM, and GPU were overclocked, and the system utilized undervolting to save energy costs.
When testing the game at 1080p resolution with high textures, the Linux system achieved an average of 63.72 frames per second (fps), while Windows 11 managed only 48.55 fps. This suggests that the game should run noticeably smoother on the Linux system.
A 30% increase in performance just might get gamers to switch over to the new operating system.
Hell that is the difference between a better graphics card for some people. It's like getting a free overclock, just for going outside your comfort zone.
This is a rare and extreme case, which is probably caused by some sort of fluke in the testing method or due to a bug in the game that Linux is handling better. Usually gaming on Linux is like ~5-10% slower for GPU-bound games.
This is likely going to change as software support for gaming on Linux improves.
If you consider real high performance computing, with well optimized libraries that can properly use the hardware (including GPUs), 50 % difference between windows and Linux is not really surprising. This is the reason 100% of real high performance computing is done on Linux. It is a better OS for raw performances than windows. For some tasks we are easily talking over twice the performances. It is not always the case, but not surprising at all.
The differences clearly depend on the actual low level implementation of the code. But in general the current situation in gaming, with windows that competes with Linux on raw performances, is only due to lack of software support for gaming on Linux. As this is changing over time, we'll see games performances greatly improve in Linux. Hopefully until the physiological surpass of windows performances.
Currently most of gaming support on Linux is done via some kind of translation layer, that has itself an overhead. It means that the real linux performance would be even better than in all these benchmarks, if it was really possible to compare 1:1 Windows and Linux with native, well optimized code.
It's not rare for games to be a few % faster, as long as they're using features that are well supported in Linux. If the bottleneck is something that needs heavier emulation because the native implementation isn't available or good enough then yeah you'll see slowdowns.
Nobara is great, based on fedora so very stable and fairly up to date with many built in gaming features and no after install setup required to get gaming. https://nobaraproject.org/
Running it for over a year now on my gaming rig and very happy
And yet, Steam hardware survey shows Linux growing almost every month. By little, yes, but still growing almost every month, with Valve and Steam themselves betting more on Linux than on Windows and the Steam Deck being a thing.
If Lemmy feels like a computer science party, tell ya what: feel free to join us, everyone's welcome. Just don't claim "cope and seethe" when there's actual growth here
Plenty of people like Linux, the real echo chamber would be some place you don't have to hear how much better alternatives there are to garbage-ass windows.
Windows 11 is trash. Microsoft kept boasting it was "faster" than 10, but it is (unsurprisingly?) heavy in some weird areas, including a less snappy start menu, more telemetry, invasive integration with their software, you name it. Tried one machine in my collection to try it via an upgrade (a Microsoft Surface Pro 6), and the performance was so bad I ended up going back to Windows 10. Multi-second lag just to get to the program shortcuts is a really bad sign.
Strange, I've had the opposite experience. I remember early on 11 was really bad and buggy in general so I waited to move my main install, but it's been fantastic for me on laptop and desktop.
Granted, I'm very particular about my Windows installs and know how to clean everything up pretty well, so I have no idea how out of box experience compares, but at least with how I use it, 11 has been fantastic, performance has been much more consistent, I don't need to reboot as often, and it lasted way longer before I felt the need for a fresh install than any of my 10 installations.
I still have certain things I'm not able to entirely fix that bug me (still searching for a way to remove the stupid Office 365 ad from the settings homepage) that weren't in Windows 10, but the settings in 11 are overall SO much better, window snapping is way better, explorer is way better, HDR support is way better, multi-monitor support is better, default apps in general are better, it's becoming easier to remove built-in apps you don't want, and just a whole bunch of small QOL changes and updated, more consistent styling, it's just a much nicer OS to use at this point.
If you haven't tried it yet, Tiny11 23H2 just came out, and while there's still some stuff I fixed after installation, it does an excellent job of trimming most of the fat off Win11 without sacrificing usability. You can use Windows update like normal (and you'll have to update after install) but it may be worth another try if you haven't tried 11 recently. IMO it's a really nice upgrade over 10 if you can fix all the little annoyances like the new right-click and such. (BloatyNosy on GitHub is what I use post-install, in addition to a few powershell commands and such)
I don't doubt you cleaned up it up well. But you are the exception rather than the rule for experiencing Windows 11.
The absolute shitfest that is the incessant integration with Bing and other online only tech is the biggest problem. If you have muscle memory like I do to start button + type keyword for a program + enter, it is unbearably slow to respond at times for the search to catch up. Or my new favorite, getting ready to hit enter, only to have it change the current selection right before.
And this is to say nothing of the critical settings you can no longer directly control or are just broken. Want to change the power profile of your laptop? Buried. Want to get an estimate on your battery time remaining? Better open the registry. Want to switch your background? Well, roll the dice on that high resolution PNG you just created; unlike 10, 11 fails on some backgrounds of certain filetypes if they're over a certain size (try a detailed PNG over 3000x4000). Just want a plain old Documents directory that isn't integrated with OneDrive? Happy hunting; turning it off ain't enough anymore.
Damn, you know what? I actually sort of liked windows 11 when I had it on an empty SSD but now that I've added all my software I've noticed it's much less snappy than win10 was.
Now I'm thinking of down(upgrading) back to windows 10 but Feel like it's going to be a hassle. I'm not as tech savvy as I used to be and can't even recall how to go back to win10 without just installing it fresh
It is just unfortunate that it does not run on Nvidia hardware. The benchmark runs if you disable all RTX features, but it crashes on a new game before you even have full control of the character.
Looking at protondb it looks like all people with Nvidia have issues since the 2.0 update. I hope there will be some fix soon. I don't want to replace the GPU yet it would be a waste (2080 Super).
Shut up and look at the more frames. - article author mumbling - God damn ingrates always complaining just because things don't work right... 30% more frames is practically 10% less controller!
໒꒰ྀི -᷅ ⤙ -᷄ ꒱ྀི১
Haha, what a crazy coincidence! I had the original cyberpunk last year on windows 10. It was glitchy as hell but ran semi decent on my hardware.
Deleted it, and last night just installed phantom liberty.
Ngl, the gameplay and feel is so far 10x better than it was before the update. It's actually complete now and if you hated it before I'd honestly recommend another try as so far I'm actually sort of enjoying the gameplay whereas I hated it before and only played for the story.
Anyway, my issue is that with all of the updates it's not running anywhere near as nice as it was before. I'm having to run it on the lowest resolution with every graphic option disabled which stinks because with the gameplay being fixed somewhat I'd really like to enjoy it graphically as well.
I've installed Ubuntu dual boot on my ssd before and can do that again but any tips? I wouldn't know about where to even get phantom liberty on fedora or how to install it?
I can definitely add it to steam as a non steam game but which drop-down? Would be awesome if this worked, thank you!
Oh and I played it exactly how I'm playing it now but not on steam, heck idk I just have a cyberpunk icon I click to open it on win11, I don't open it with steam or anything but will try for the dropdown
It's a well known fact that every second major release of Windows is crap.
Windows 95 was not the best.
Windows 95OSR2 was the one you wanted.
Windows 98 sucked.
Windows 98 2nd ed. worked as the former should have.
Windows 2000 was great but had no support for running games.
XP solved that and made people leave Windows 98 (I deliberately left out the clusterf... Windows ME.).
Windows Vista sucked balls.
Windows 7 was what Vista should have been.
Windows 8? Metro on phones, yes! On desktop? No no no.
Windows 10 got Microsoft back on track again.
I thought the new upgrade scheme (2 editions per year) Microsoft introduced with Windows 10 would be like "every second release will suck" but it started to look like Microsoft were able to break the curse....
casusally skipping millenium edition because most people opted to buy windows 2000, the enterprise server os instead.
Windows 2000 couldn't run games because it was based on Windows NT and the NT Kernel. ME was still based on DOS.
XP frankensteined the NT Kernel and DOS to somehow make the most stable, longest running and best windows ever.
Windows 2000 could run games (I should know: I kept being a gamer whilst using it for years) but in the early days with so many games designed for DOS that required direct low level access it was a problem. If I remember it correct one had to boot in DOS mode for those.
Eventually with DirectX that stopped being a problem (plus, again if I remember it correctly, OpenGL also became compatible with it).
I ran 2000 back in the day and didn't really have any problems with it. IMO it breaks the pattern somewhat. XP was better, of course, but 2000 was a good OS.
W2k was awesome. Great stability. However, the legacy from Windows NT meant that applications had no direct access to hardware which games of that time required.
That was a showstopper for most users outside the enterprise world.
By the way, the "rendering at lower resolution and upscaling" thingy, is there a way to force AMD's version on any game in Linux? I want to play Satisfactory and got a 5700G, fat iGPU but only 2GB VRAM.
have two of these machines built and operating in the house
both are able to play modern games including Hogwarts Legacy low settings at 60fps no ray tracing
some games run fine with medium or high
some games such as Hogwarts Legacy and Marvel’s Spider-Man Remastered require a per game specialized wine wrapper script that is usually already made by an awesome entity unless you go through the steam launcher and then it just plays like a steam deck
"Steam Deck runs SteamOS version 3, based on the Arch Linux operating system. While SteamOS had been previously developed for Steam Machines using Debian Linux, Valve stated that they wanted to use a rolling upgrade approach for the Deck's system software, a function Debian was not designed for but was a feature of Arch Linux. An application programming interface (API) specific for the Steam Deck is available to game developers, allowing a game to specify certain settings if it is being run on a Steam Deck compared to a normal computer. Within the Steam storefront, developers can populate a special file depot for their game with lower-resolution textures and other reduced elements to allow their game to perform better on the Steam Deck; Steam automatically detects and downloads the appropriate files for the system (whether on a computer or Steam Deck) when the user installs the game"
I wouldn't know personally. I don't use linux for games except on my steam deck, so I don't have any knowledge on the subject. That does make some sense though if WINE relies on tricking software into thinking it's Windows.
Wine simulates a Windows environment to some degree, Steam is the only platform that fixed the reporting issue and that wasn't always the case ether because the system tells the game it's Windows.
Sure, but that's not necessarily a bad thing; if the Linux version is missing useful output that would be bad, but if the DX to Vulkan translation ironed out a performance regression, or the scheduler works better in this scenario, or filesystem access had issues with NTFS it could also cause performance differences in Linux favour.
well, unfortunately i have the opposite but it's not too bad.
high settings with motion blur etc.,fsr disabled but with chromatic aberration on i get like 10fps less than windows
gtx 1660 ti and ryzen 5 3600
prolly a nvidia issue
Chromatic aberration is so bad, it's trying to imitate bad lenses in a camera instead of our eyes which are so fine tuned that we don't really have it(unless you need glasses lenses)
@cron
I couldn't get the link to work--I get a server error--but I was able to look at the video on YouTube, so this might be useful to others with the same issue:
Edit: I did get the link to work one out of five times. I guess the site is just congested? I don't know. But anyway, there's a link to the YouTube video directly anyway.
30% is extremely surprising. I'd expect single digit percent gains, if any, on Linux. This 30% difference was in the opposite direction 10 years ago, when Windows had access to low-level graphics APIs and Linux was only on OpenGL. I wouldn't expect there to be 30% worth of frames per second to be tied to Windows bloat.
Exactly. And usually there's a 5-10% performance penalty on Linux because of WINE overhead when running Windows games on Linux, but sometimes Linux makes up for it in other ways (maybe the scheduler) and can get 5-10% faster.