Top
Best
New

Posted by haunter 3 days ago

Linux gaming is faster because Windows APIs are becoming Linux kernel features(www.xda-developers.com)
782 points | 498 commentspage 3
bsimpson 18 hours ago|
I remember when XDA was the home of Android homebrew hackers working on things like CyanogenMod. It's so strange to see it repurposed as the brand for the same quasi-correct tech article slop that gets parroted between all the big blogs.

Tom's Hardware is a bit before my time, but I remember it being well regarded. I've seen a lot of similar articles under that name lately. I wonder if they've undergone similar fates.

sphars 17 hours ago||
Same with all the bigger tech blogs from a decade ago. How-To Geek is completely overrun with the same sort of slop. Finally had to remove it from my RSS reader.

Oh look at that, XDA and HTG are both owned by Valnet:

https://www.valnetinc.com/en/technology

stuartq 16 hours ago|||
At least Anandtech just shut down rather than turning into a zombie tech blog.
r_lee 17 hours ago|||
private equity, what would we do without you?!
Fogest 15 hours ago|||
I get a lot of XDA articles appearing in my Google News feeds and a good chunk of the ones I read definitely have the slop half baked vibe to them. Where they barely provide much substance in the article and sometimes barely even address what the article headline said. They also pump out so many articles about the same topics. I swear I've seen like 100 articles from them just on Obsidian Notes alone and so many of them are barebones and lackluster.

There is the odd decent nugget in there, but it is a shame seeing them fall like this. Unfortunately the same sentiment is true about most news sites now.

MBCook 12 hours ago|||
Tom’s Hardware was a fantastic site back in its heyday. Very highly regarded.
hx8 16 hours ago|||
This is not just a Tech Journalism problem, but applies to a lot of other Journalism.
navigate8310 17 hours ago||
The same happened with AndroidPolice
FartyMcFarter 2 hours ago||
As someone without strong feelings on Linux vs Windows (I've used and developed on both about equally): this kind of news, along the way Windows has been changing has me wondering if I should change my primary desktop environment at home to Linux.

In my eyes, Windows used to be the desktop environment that "just works and can run almost everything". Lately it's becoming enshittified, with weird bugs showing up more and more frequently (a memorable one is not being able to launch Notepad from the start menu!!). I think Microsoft is losing its best attributes when it comes to consumer software. Linux may not be perfect but it's looking more and more attractive in comparison, even with its imperfections.

caycep 18 hours ago||
If you purpose build a Linux gaming PC, would you lean more towards AMD GPUs over Nvidia?
eikenberry 18 hours ago||
AMD. The final holdout, HDMI 2.1 support being blocked by the HDMI group, has been overcome w/ the HDMI group relenting and support is now landing in the kernel (expected in 7.2).

https://www.gamingonlinux.com/2026/05/further-expanded-amd-h...

somat 17 hours ago|||
I sort of figured that HDMI stupidity was strategically a good thing as it sort of brought the dynamic of the HDMI consortium and VESA. specifically how they treat the end users, more to the public eye.

That is, more people being subtly pushed to using display port is not a bad thing.

_puk 17 hours ago||
I was faintly surprised that my recent monitor purchase came with a displayport cable.

Didn't help connecting it to my Macbook, but still..

esseph 16 hours ago|||
DisplayPort has been running the best PC high end monitors for a long while. HDMI OTOH has been in A/V land (DRM management).
babypuncher 15 hours ago|||
Don't most monitors ship with DisplayPort cables? All of mine have. HDMI is more popular with TVs/home theater systems.
tombert 9 hours ago||
Outside of the ones built into laptops, all my "monitors" for the last decade have been TVs, just because they tend to be cheaper at a "price to size" level.

None of them ever seem to have DisplayPort.

perching_aix 17 hours ago||||
I didn't follow this story much: how exactly did they get past the legal hurdles? Or there never actually were any hurdles, just sabre rattling?
JCTheDenthog 17 hours ago||
Purely rumor, but supposedly Valve put tons of pressure on them (no idea by what means, again this is all rumor) because they wanted support for the Steam Machine release.
cute_boi 18 hours ago|||
any reason why we are using hdmi over display port?
ThatPlayer 17 hours ago|||
Unless you're on the absolute newest stuff with DisplayPort 2.1, HDMI 2.1 has more bandwidth than DP1.4. That'll be Nvidias 2000 through 4000 series. No DisplayPort 2.1 until the RTX 5000s.

And then monitors released during this time generally do the same too.

Also if you want to use it through a capture card, HDMI ones are way more common and cheaper

esseph 16 hours ago||
AMD Radeon 7000 and 9000 series all support DisplayPort 2.1
saidinesh5 17 hours ago||||
The vast majority of the TVs only come with HDMI .. not even good enough analog inputs anymore..
0cf8612b2e1e 17 hours ago|||
I have been told (but not confirmed) that is mandated by the HDMI mob. If you want HDMI on your TV, it cannot also have DP.
okanat 17 hours ago|||
This can only be true for consumer-grade stuff. Even then I just guess the manufacturers kind of cheap out.

I have a dumb-ish Samsung Hotel TV / commercial TV at home. It has DP.

MarsIronPI 16 hours ago||
I want a TV with DP. Do you have a recommended source for where to pick up commercial TVs?
okanat 13 hours ago||
I live in Germany and I got mine from https://www.visunext.de/
bee_rider 16 hours ago|||
Which is kind of funny. At least, to my mind this has associated HDMI-only with the budget option (TVs), and DP with the premium tier (monitors).
bayesnet 17 hours ago|||
What really drives me nuts is smart TVs with 100mbps Ethernet connections. When I bought a tv we looked in vain for gigabit Ethernet.
navigate8310 17 hours ago|||
It is futile to expect the TV to be smart and support all sorts of apps and hardware only to be abandoned by the manufacturer years down the line. The only correct way to buy a TV imho is to hunt for a dumb but excellent display properties and get a streaming device such as Google TV Streamer, Apple TV or DIY x86 HTPC.
cwel 15 hours ago||
>DIY x86 HTPC

ARM slander was not warranted

Dylan16807 15 hours ago||
Are there DIY Arm boards that make a good HTPC? Do they have hardware video decoding?
ihsw 13 hours ago||
[dead]
Sohcahtoa82 9 hours ago||||
With what feels like weekly posts about someone being shocked their smart TV is showing them ads, I'm surprised you looked for gigabit for your TV.

I've had a smart TV for over 5 years and never connected it to the Internet.

tombert 9 hours ago||
I connected my Samsung TV to the WiFi for the first time two weeks ago because I wanted to play with the multi-screen-view thing, and it didn't appear to work with two HDMI cables.

It has not shut up asking me to update the fucking thing. Every time I turn the TV on, about twenty seconds later an update prompt will pop up, and it will not go away until I actively dismiss it. This happened even after disconnecting and forgetting the wifi. Never again.

hamdingers 15 hours ago||||
Unfortunately we're the weird ones for wanting to stream >100mbps content.

My 2020 LG CX has a USB 2.0 port and I get ~300mbps with a gigabit adapter, if the TV you ended up with has a USB port it's worth a try.

kiririn 14 hours ago||
What >100mbps content is there? 4K bluray just needs a bigger buffer to handle >100mbps spikes (Kodi for example offers this) and Moonlight/Apollo/etc is well into diminishing returns
hamdingers 12 hours ago||
4k blu-ray remuxes break 100mbps for long enough to cause problems on my TV, unless I use either wifi or the USB adapter. Others have done investigations showing in some movies the bitrate will exceed 100mbps for minutes at a time.

1. https://www.reddit.com/r/PleX/comments/eoa03e/psa_100_mbps_i...

izacus 16 hours ago|||
TVs are made with BOM of like 10$ for the SoC, so it's the cheapest crap available.

Then again - none of the streaming services are streaming at anything remotely close to 100Mbps so I doubt they consider it necessary to upgrade to GbE.

bisby 17 hours ago||||
Some people have TVs or displays that only use HDMI. I personally wouldn't recommend HDMI if DisplayPort is available, but if HDMI is your only option, then having it work properly will be important.
eikenberry 17 hours ago||||
My monitor has 1 displayport and 2 hdmi and I have 2 computers I use with it. They can't share the displayport. All comparable monitors (last time I checked) have the same. So it'd be nice if both worked.
jaxefayo 17 hours ago|||
For one, DisplayPort doesn’t support HDR output
hmry 17 hours ago|||
That can't be right. I'm reading this comment on an HDR monitor over DP right now.

Don't all USB-C video outputs use DP alt mode too, with an HDMI adapter at the end? And they can do HDR.

funimpoded 17 hours ago||||
The cable length limitations are also a pain in the ass for not-uncommon A/V system configurations. 6' recommended max, and the best you might get working stably if the device and cable gods smile on you is 15'. 6' is the lower edge of acceptable for just about any A/V system setup (in practice it means your devices need to be within about a meter of the screen's port[s], which is pretty close) and even 15' is still too short to be useful for, say, a projector, or a "the A/V receiver or HDMI switch is over in that cabinet, the TV is on this wall across the room" situation.

HDMI goes 25'+, no problem.

Dylan16807 14 hours ago|||
For 4k at 60Hz, you'd need HDMI 2.0 or DP 1.2. At those speeds, both kinds of cable should be able to reach 25 feet, and I can find reputable brands selling both kinds at the length.
simoncion 14 hours ago|||
> HDMI goes 25'+, no problem.

Yep. That's likely because that's an active cable. Active DisplayPort cables exist, too. Here is one vendor selling active UHBR10 cables [0]. If you don't NEED UHBR, then you'll find your selection to be much, much larger. I've been using some Monoprice-branded 50 and 100 ft active fiber-optic HBR3 DisplayPort cables for years with no problem.

[0] <https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/displayport-cables/c...>

john_strinlai 17 hours ago||||
displayport has supported HDR10 since 2016

and displayport 2.0, since 2019, has supported all the same variations (hdr10+, dolby vision) that HDMI does

Gracana 17 hours ago||||
Do you mean in practice, or something? DP definitely supports HDR, and it seems to work fine for me.
Sohcahtoa82 9 hours ago||||
Confidently incorrect.

My main monitor is 4K 240 hz HDR and it works great on my DisplayPort cable, especially the HDR.

wolfd 17 hours ago||||
This seems wrong to me? I use it to do so every day.
traderj0e 16 hours ago|||
If true, not supporting HDR is a feature
SimianSci 18 hours ago|||
AMD does a lot of work to ensure their support for Linux is first-class. With the kernel now natively supporting their systems, you can expect good support. It's earned them some good will over Nvidia which has gotten better recently with the rise of AI, but still requires users to jump through a couple of hoops due to their attempts to protect their IP.
somat 17 hours ago||
It is more than that, I really like openbsd as a desktop system. This is niche enough that I have zero expectation for any sort of support from the hardware vendors. However, because the amd drivers are opensource. Heroic people in the obsd dev community are able to make it work there. I don't strictly need a gaming gpu for my desktop work, but it is nice to have a setup I can boot linux on to play games with.

Heroic because the amdgpu driver is strangely huge, more code than the rest of the obsd kernel combined, It has something to do with gpu's having no isa stability and the generated code for each card present in the driver.

tapoxi 17 hours ago|||
I built a Linux gaming PC a few years ago, running Bazzite.

AMD is much better. Nvidia has been improving but stuff "just works" with AMD because the kernel (amdgpu) and userspace (RADV) drivers are open source. Valve is a major RADV contributor too.

I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything with my 9070 XT. Performance is great.

LooseMarmoset 15 hours ago|||
Nvidia makes a fine GPU. The problem with Nvidia on linux is the drivers. You're beholden to Team Green for driver updates, and when they decide not to support a GPU anymore, that's it. Now, linux does have the nouveau driver, but that doesn't support all the hardware or much 3d at all, and never will.

I particularly got fed up with Nvidia on linux playing War Thunder - I had a regular crash that Gaijin and Nvidia each blamed on each other, and I never did get it fixed.

Nvidia driver updates can also leave you stuck with no desktop environment on occasion and while fixable, it's a pain in the rear. However, when the drivers are right, Nvidia performance is second to none.

AMD has drivers built right into the kernel, and as long as you have whichever nonfree firmware repos your distro supports (I use Devuan, a Debian derivative), AMD cards 'just work'. If using xorg, install xserver-xorg-video-amdgpu for modern cards, and xserver-xorg-video-radeon for older cards. I'm currently playing on a Radeon 9070 (non-XT) on a 1440p monitor with plenty of performance. I know that it also works on wayland, but I have no experience there.

nialv7 13 hours ago||
open source nvidia is an area to keep an eye on. check out NVK and nova.
hx8 16 hours ago|||
I think this gets overblown a bit. AMD is better, but Nvidia can work. There's plenty of valid reasons to put in the extra effort and go with Nvidia.
isityettime 8 hours ago|||
AMD began the process of open-sourcing their Linux graphics drivers more than 20 years ago. At that time, they had no working open-source drivers yet; they'd only just released some hardware documentation. I told myself then that if they came through and delivered open-source drivers, I was an AMD customer for life. I've more or less held to it. I don't remember the last time I considered NVIDIA an option.

NVIDIA has apparently open-sourced the kernel drivers for their most recent couple generations of graphics cards. That's great! But they have a hell of a lot of catching up to do. Their kernel drivers aren't in the mainline Linux kernel. Their userspace drivers are proprietary, whereas AMD's are open-source. AMD's kernel drivers are built into Linux and their userspace drivers are built into Mesa.

That history of greater compatibility matters in its own right: all of the developers of Linux desktop environments, window managers, and compositors have been running AMD or Intel GPUs almost exclusively for many years.

If "voting with your wallet" means anything to you, or you want things to "just work", AMD is the clear choice and it's not even close.

If you already have NVIDIA hardware, by all means, go ahead. It's doable. But AMD is a way more rational choice on Linux for most users.

traderj0e 16 hours ago|||
I hope this is right, because "you have to use AMD GPU" is not what people want to hear when building a PC.
hx8 16 hours ago|||
I know plenty of people that use Nvidia and Linux, and it's something I've done in the past. You just suck it up and install the closed-source black box drivers and get on with your life.
bee_rider 16 hours ago||
Although, eventually NVIDIA will drop support for your card and you’ll have an annoying situation. This happened for Pascal on Arch Linux a while ago. The 10X0 series are pretty old at this point, but then Linux shines on older systems too.
notnullorvoid 16 hours ago|||
You can still use the old drivers they work fine. This also isn't unique to Linux, Nvidia's latest Windows drivers also don't support 10 series cards anymore.
Narishma 14 hours ago||
Unless the old drivers have security issues, then you're stuck with the nouveau driver which sometimes only has very basic support for some GPUs.
hx8 13 hours ago||
Is this the case for any hardware or are we discussing a purely hypothetical?
kouteiheika 16 hours ago|||
NVidia supports their GPUs for a really long time (unlike AMD, which paradoxically drops official support really fast; e.g. see their ROCm support). Anyway, by the time NVidia drops support for their current newer GPUs there's a high chance that NVK[1] will be ready for general use.

[1] -- https://docs.mesa3d.org/drivers/nvk.html

turpentine 12 hours ago||||
From people who have been using Linux since the 90s, the long term view is that nvidia has always been mostly fine since the early 2000s for hw acceleration if you didn't mind a binary blob. Yes, there have always been driver bugs - but that was never unique to a specific platform, i.e. nvidia on macos had opengl driver bugs that went unfixed for eternity until support was dropped, then the bug reports could be closed.

Comparatively the leading alternative was a dumpster fire of a broken mess for the longest time on Linux. All through the 2000s, ATi provided a binary blob driver known as fglrx which some people joked was a half-baked codebase from somemthing that started on HP-UX, passable enough for running sales demos and then was thrown at an intern to port it to Linux. If you went with ATi and tried to do much with foss opengl programs, you could expect daily or weekly kernel panics and performance that was <50% of that of the windows driver for an identical build. The solution was always to buy nvidia if you wanted stability.

Nothing has really changed for Nvidia on Linux, it still continues to perform adequetly. Plenty of people, including myself have used the binary blob for games and other 3D software with wine through the late 2000s, 2010s and proton in the 2020s without much comment because it works fine. The exception being that if you buy a used card, coming up on 10+ years old because your requirements are minimal - don't expect current driver support. Nvidia drop support for old cards on Windows too.

AMD is definitely night and day in terms of meeting the free software ecosystem properly, and so arguably the reason to go with a new AMD card is voting for that kind of support with your wallet.

esseph 16 hours ago|||
There's so much "old info" that people pass around online when it comes to linux (or anything I guess with an ever evolving feature set).

Any modern distro running NVidia or AMD should be fine. I've done both. I didn't have to do anything for the NVIDIA 3000 or NVIDIA 4000 series cards but select the nvidia driver. AMD otoh is built into kernel now.

jerf 16 hours ago|||
I run Steam on Ubuntu with a "GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER" (according to lspci), and while it generally works it has some weird issues with gaming in Linux. Some games end up with what feels like ~200ms latency for no apparent reason, and frame rates on some things like Just Cause 3, which I ought to be horribly overspec'd for (a 2015 game) run comfortably, but just barely, which really isn't right. And Persona 5 gets about 2 frames per second in Linux. My Steam Deck pushes it at 60 at 720p with no problem, and I think was pushing out 1080 at one point quite playably, and I think I benchmarked my PC at ~6 times more powerful than my Steam Deck.

Whereas the AMD-based Steam Deck always does what it should do.

lunar_rover 17 hours ago|||
Right now AMD is the better choice due to support from Valve. It might change in the future due to Red Hat's effort.
uyzstvqs 17 hours ago|||
AMD has provided great support for far longer, but newer Nvidia cards which support the nvidia-open driver should also be good.

Still, if you don't absolutely need CUDA, then AMD provides better value anyway.

dgunay 17 hours ago|||
I bought AMD as my last GPU purely because it meant I didn't have to stress out about how I was actually going to acquire one. I just walked into Microcenter, picked one off the shelf, and checked out. It was the crypto craze then, and I get the impression that this hasn't changed much today with AI sucking all the oxygen out of consumer electronics. Didn't care very much about DLSS or any other Nvidia specific features. That AMD works well on Linux only sweetened the deal.
anschl 18 hours ago|||
People say you will have less problems with AMD but I am using a Nvidia GPU for years now (on Cachyos and Pop OS) without issues. I'm using Steam and Proton pretty much exclusively though.
stuxnet79 18 hours ago|||
Which card and which drivers? I switched from Windows 10 to Xubuntu last year and have had endless issues with my Nvidia card (GTX 970). At the moment, I can't even use the desktop without annoying flickering & hard to diagnose / fix bugs.

Its an old card so I have no idea why I'm still struggling to get it to work. Is it perhaps because I'm using Xfce? I heard that Nvidia cards play better with Wayland although I haven't tested this myself.

davidspiess 17 hours ago|||
I run a GTX 970 on Fedora 44 KDE Plasma (Wayland) without issues. Make sure to use the 580.xx Nvidia driver.
okanat 17 hours ago||||
Anything between 700 and 2000 series (inclusive) is in this "completely proprietary due to signed firmware but also not fully supported in Wayland" zone. You need to have at least 3000 series to have proprietary drivers with open kernel driver and good KMS/GBM/Wayland support.
maplant 17 hours ago|||
I can't speak for the parent but I have a 5090 and it works perfectly fine
saidinesh5 17 hours ago|||
Nvidia on desktop has been mostly fine, if not rock solid, on the happy path they provide.

But their happy path hasn't included proper wayland support for a long time.

Nvidia on laptops? Insert the famous Linus Torvalds meme here

notnullorvoid 16 hours ago|||
Nvidia on laptops is fine. There was a time that it was really difficult and the easiest route to success was to disable the Intel iGPU, and force Nvidia GPU to handle everything in BIOS. That hasn't been the case for a while, and you can even get nice desktop environment integration to let you choose which GPU to run a program with.
the_af 17 hours ago|||
> Nvidia on laptops? Insert the famous Linus Torvalds meme here

I have an RTX 5070 (whatever the laptop variant is) and it absolutely rocks with almost everything I throw at it, running Ubuntu+Steam+Proton. I no longer worry whether a Windows game is going to run, because almost all of them do with good performance.

saidinesh5 17 hours ago||
I think things might have changed in the last 6-7 years? That's when I switched away from Nvidia.

Or does your laptop have no other igpu?

My last Nvidia laptop was a Hybrid optimus laptop. I almost always ran it on the built in Intel igpu because of the really bad issues with the Nvidia cards. Video tearing, bad power management etc... I remember even switching the GPU wasn't easy... And performance wasn't as good either ..

the_af 15 hours ago||
[dead]
everdrive 17 hours ago|||
AMD for sure. Years ago for Linux NVIDIA was the sure winner. At the moment, AMD beats it out soundly on both cost and performance. ie, the same game running on either an NVIDIA or AMD GPU in Linux will generally run much better on the AMD GPU.
notnullorvoid 15 hours ago|||
Either. If you want Nvidia features like DLSS then go with NVidia.
notac26 18 hours ago|||
Def AMD. And if your focus is gaming I’d give SteamOS a go. With a full AMD setup you should basically be plug and play.
mrsvanwinkle 15 hours ago|||
I technically have both in one laptop with an AMD iGPU and an RTX GPU. Most of my problems with archlinux is running a 240Hz HDR monitor on dGPU, where the NVIDIA firmware glitches into buffer out of memory errors not reading the CDID properly, and this was solved only less than a month ago with latest beta driver. Lingering problem is waking from memory with crashed plasmashell but this one is KDE Plasma specific, while the monitor one is Linux wide.
MattPalmer1086 17 hours ago|||
Just anecdata, but I just got a Lenovo T16 with AMD. Graphics is just painless, everything works with no issues. My old system with an Nvidia card running the same O/S keeps running into weird issues. It mostly works, just needs attention and little tweaks and extra stuff sometimes.
the8472 17 hours ago|||
For gaming and desktop use AMD is great, though for raytracing you'll need newer cards. If you want to run local AI models too then AMD is quite shaky, rocm only supports a few cards with each version and their software stack just isn't as polished as nvidia's.
graynk 18 hours ago|||
AMDs are much better supported. There is life with NVIDIA GPUs too, I am on 4070Ti currently doing fine, but for new builds AMD is clearly a better choice with better drivers
ammut 17 hours ago|||
End of 2024 I did exactly that. Ryzen and RADEON all the way. Rocking Fedora right now but was using Ubuntu for a bit. I have no reason to use Windows at all.
jimmaswell 17 hours ago|||
AFAIK none of AMD's offerings match the 5090 for pure gaming performance, so personally that's what I would stick with regardless.
RussianCow 16 hours ago||
Sure, if you're made of money. For the rest of us, AMD gives you more bang for your buck. Though in this market, it's hard to argue that any of them give you good value.
progforlyfe 16 hours ago|||
yes absolutely -- although I did use Nvidia GTX 1070 for a bunch of years without much of an issue, and I still believe Nvidia gets you more "bang for your buck", I would only buy AMD cards now due to the more integral support with Linux gaming.
guizadillas 18 hours ago|||
yes
tryauuum 17 hours ago||
both are shit

I used a recent nvidia blackwell GPU with linux, periodic crashes. Blackwell generation is shit.

Used recent builtin AMD GPU... Even worse, super reproduceable X crashes when using firefox

Pooge 17 hours ago||
In good faith, you can't really say "[x] is shit" if you don't have an usual setup; X11 is no longer the default on most distros. Even when I was also using it, it never crashed.

I don't know whether your GPU is older than mine or not but I have the RX 7700XTX. Maybe it had a software defect...

traderj0e 17 hours ago||
Linux Mint uses X11 for some reason. I was getting black screen after sleep because of that. Nuked it and installed Ubuntu, worked fine.
HDBaseT 13 hours ago||
Mint has experimental Wayland support right now. The future for Mint is Wayland.
pluc 13 hours ago||
It can't be neglected that Microsoft is alienating its own power users on such a level that they are now considering switching over and bringing all their know-how with them. Linux gaming is also faster because there's more developers interested in making gaming work outside of the Microsoft dominion.
protocolture 6 hours ago|
Man if only they had a leader at Microsoft that was famous for prioritising developers.
caspper69 2 hours ago||
They still prioritize developers, look at .NET Core, Typescript, NPM, Github (lol), but the problem is that they're not Windows exclusive enclaves anymore. In fact, I'd bet most people now deploy (and probably develop) .NET Core on non-Windows machines.
krige 6 hours ago||
Meanwhile I'm over here, trying to get Age of Wonders 1 to run and completely failing on everything spare a laptop with an old Windows 7 installation. Linux API aping (sorry) is so good that they even exhibit the exact same CTD as Windows 10 with this game.
embeng4096 13 hours ago||
I switched to Linux for everything but AAA FPS PVP games last year and have had a great experience so far.

Steam+Proton makes everything I play just work: Helldivers 2, Slay the Spire 2, No Rest For The Wicked, FF7 Remake, Stardew, modded Lethal Company (using r2modman) are the main things I've been playing recently, and all worked out of the box with Proton.

My PS5 controller may have needed me to install one package or something but has been working flawlessly after that.

I keep a Windows drive around for stuff like Apex Legends, Battlefield 6, but I pretty much never boot into Windows anymore except for those.

(I probably sound like a shill at this point, having commented something like this on multiple Linux threads now, but I continue to be impressed at how well Linux performs for gaming these days!)

stodor89 12 hours ago||
Win32 - the #1 stable userland ABI for Linux!
sylware 1 hour ago||
If you don't compile the CPU hardware bugs mitigation for linux, which windows has, you'll be mechanically and significantly faster.

1 + 1 = 2

h3t08 14 hours ago||
It’s wild to think that the "Year of the Linux Desktop" didn't happen because of a massive marketing push, but because the kernel just slowly absorbed the competition's DNA.
tantalor 15 hours ago|
https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/

How do I actually see the graph?

All I see is stats for April:

- Windows 93.47% +1.14%

- Linux 4.52% -0.81%

- OSX 2.01% -0.34%

braiamp 15 hours ago|
Valve doesn't keep a historic of the numbers, you will have to do with people that collect them and aggregates them https://www.gamingonlinux.com/steam-tracker/
More comments...