GZDoom 4.9.0 survey - the final rundown

[Chris]

What a mess. As if Linux didn't have enough problems already, now that a solution to one of the biggest is gaining some acceptance, a corporate bully comes along and destroys everything. Well done!

Ubuntu doesn't have the pull or mind share it used to, Canonical won't "destroy everything". There are reasons Valve stopped using Ubuntu as the basis for SteamOS and switched to Arch with SteamOS 3.0 and the Steam Deck. This isn't the first time Ubuntu has whined about something not theirs is more popular. What will likely happen is Canonical will keep dragging their feet for a while as they continue losing relevance, Flatpak will continue to gain traction, and at some point they'll do an about-face and start playing nicer with Flatpak (or they won't and they'll keep sliding that much faster to irrelevance).

[Graf Zahl]

Let's hope you are correct. But this action surely makes the road a lot bumpier than it needed to be.

[Ihavequestions]

While that is true, I don't know what the big issue is, this seems needlessly pedantic and particular. Why is it *so* important that it specifically be named Debian? - It's not compiled on Debian, it's compiled and made with Ubuntu, though some effort goes into making it work on other distros. In fact it's very likely to work on other distros that have some form of deb reader/converter. Ultimately it's harmless, if it works it works if not you have other options.

I mean, it's needlessly particular to reference Ubuntu when that isn't even needed at all. The packages do not require anything Ubuntu-specific. They are Debian packages, so they should be named correspondingly.

[Rachael]

Agree to disagree. It's where the packages are created, assembled, and tested, and it is where direct support is offered.

Not going to waste time arguing with you about this - this has already crossed into "it's pointless" more than enough as it is.

[Graf Zahl]

Here's some interesting numbers.

I just upgraded my GPU from a Geforce 1060 to a Geforce 3060, along with a driver update.

The first thing I noticed after doing some comparisons of the FPS I get with Frozen Time (a heavily draw call bound map):

On the GTX 1060 I got 95 fps with both OpenGL and Vulkan.
On the GTX 3060 on the other hand things look different. Vulkan gives me 95-100 fps, but OpenGL fluctuates between 75 and 85 fps.

So what I once predicted seems to come true: Driver manufacturers will put ever less effort into OpenGL for newer hardware, making the API increasingly less competitive over time.
It still seems to be fine to handle older games, but it seems to have become DOA for software that needs performance, even on NVidia now...

[Gez]

So it's not so much Vulkan getting better as OpenGL getting worse. That's honestly disappointing for an upgrade. Now if it was OpenGL still at 95, but Vulkan now getting 120, that would be something else...

[dpJudas]

I don't think the Vulkan number can increase from a hardware upgrade because on Graf's computer (both 1060 and 3060) it is the GPU that is waiting on the CPU. There is the vk_submit_size CVAR that could slightly improve the FPS if it is tweaked exactly for his computer, but even then I'm pretty sure the 3060 will be bored. For better numbers a better algorithm is needed. Either by offloading to worker threads or reducing the total computations required by the CPU per frame.