this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2023
495 points (93.5% liked)

Technology

59108 readers
3257 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
495
Linux vs Windows tested in 10 games - Linux 17% faster on Average (video.hardlimit.com)
submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
167 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Linux vs Windows tested in 10 games - Linux 17% faster on Average::Computers, hardware, software and gaming in Spanish and English

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] taaz@biglemmowski.win 34 points 1 year ago (1 children)

AVs on windows also do impact disk latency a lot.

[–] TheOSINTguy@sh.itjust.works 32 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Not to also mention the outdated filesytem

[–] Gork@lemm.ee 27 points 1 year ago (2 children)

We should rename NTFS to OTFS now.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

For real - it would be AWESOME if you could install windows on ZFS or btrfs or whatever

[–] targetx@programming.dev 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You'd still be running Windows though so why bother

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

While I agree that Linux is generally better, there are some use cases outside of gaming that work better in (or are required to use for one reason or another) Windows.

[–] targetx@programming.dev 3 points 1 year ago

Oh I definitely agree. But still; when I'm running Windows the filesystem is very low on my list of annoyances.

[–] lorddresefer@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

That has a hell of a lot of disclaimers around reliability, and I’m not seeing anything about it being able to actually host the operating system on the filesystem itself, or any way to roll this into the installer itself

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

They knew it’s not going to stay new forever, but they went ahead with that name anyway. I guess that’s what happens when the marketing team wins the company raffle.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

NTFS isn't the issue, at least in my experience, and not even Microsoft's implementation of it (though ntfs-3g seems faster). The issue is the File Explorer: Things like reading mtimes of gigantic directories takes maybe a second under linux, nushell under windows (native, not WSL) is just a tiny bit slower, while File Explorer takes minutes to sort by mtime. Coming to think of it I should try Dolphin.

Generally speaking the problem with Windows is not so much NT but everything on top of it.