Reddit test: add expected files

[gofetch.git] / test / expected / REDDIT / 2018-10-09_11-00_BATTLETECH_Linux_beta_l

   BATTLETECH LINUX BETA LOADING TEN TIMES FASTER THAN ON WINDOWS  \r
                        10? OH, THE IRONY...                       \r
\r
  [linux_gaming] 2018-10-09_11-00\r
\r
  o Reference: 2018-10-09_11-00_BATTLETECH_Linux_beta_l\r
  o News link: https://www.reddit.com/r/linux_gaming/comments/9ld2i1/battletech_linux_beta_loading_ten_times_faster/\r
  o Source link: https://steamcommunity.com/app/637090/discussions/0/1693788384146305062/?ctp=13#c2747650363470418004\r
\r
\r
    ive  always  noticed  that  stuff  loads  much  faster on Linux\r
    compared to windows, can someone explain why?\r
\r
\r
  ** zee220\r
     ive always noticed that stuff loads much faster on Linux\r
     compared to windows, can someone explain why?\r
\r
     ** pwgen-sy100\r
        Better filesystem's, better IO scheduling, better scheduling\r
        in general, less chances of some stupid ass av to clog up all\r
        the io is what I've found.\r
\r
        ** breakbeats573\r
           Unless you open calculator on Ubuntu. It's comical\r
           actually.\r
\r
\r
        ** zebediah49\r
           Also what appears to be more aggressive caching, and less\r
           bloat to burn through memory that would otherwise be\r
           cached.\r
           I've note looked too carefully at it, but Windows machines\r
           usually appear to have a whole lot of free memory, and\r
           relatively little cached.\r
           Meanwhile, my laptop has 10GB of "stuff" just floating\r
           around in memory in case I happen to want it.\r
\r
\r
\r
     ** jhansonxi\r
        Yesterday I updated a Win10 laptop that had been sitting on a\r
        shelf for two years. I could have installed a dozens systems\r
        with *buntu using a online install from a mini boot image,\r
        with all major apps installed and updated, in the time it\r
        took Win10 to finish its updates, update reattempts, and\r
        dozen or so reboots. What's worse is that most of the Win10\r
        updates were either for the OS or Office only. Any Linux\r
        package manager updates nearly everything and Steam handles\r
        most of the rest.\r
\r
\r
     ** Batolemaeus\r
        AV is the worst offender because it hooks into all I/O. But\r
        there's also significant overhead in NTFS when dealing with\r
        many small files. It's partially the cost of the much more\r
        involved security model on NT (and ACL processing). That's\r
        why compiling has an extreme performance penalty on Windows,\r
        since it reads and writes many small files.\r
\r
\r
     ** aaronfranke\r
        In addition to what's already been said, EXT4 doesn't\r
        fragment nearly as much as NTFS.\r
\r
\r
     ** Craftkorb\r
        Linux is pretty good when it comes to utilizing (otherwise)\r
        free memory, using it to cache ("buffer") parts of your\r
        drives. Just try to do an reading-intensive I/O task, like\r
        find / -name stdio.h . The first may take a while, but then\r
        just rerun the command. It's much quicker, because Linux\r
        cached (in this case) the file structure the first time, and\r
        now can just quickly grab it from there again for the second\r
        time.\r
        Want to see the caching of files (and not structures) in\r
        action? Find any medium sized file (about a gigabyte in\r
        size). Now, call md5sum path/to/the/file on it. Call it again\r
        afterwards. It should be much faster.\r
        Don't have such a file handy? You can generate a "large.file"\r
        using dd if=/dev/zero of=large.file bs=4096 count=262144 . Do\r
        note that by doing this, Linux will already have (all or\r
        parts of) the file cached, the difference between both calls\r
        should be much smaller.\r
        A much more file-centric system basically requires a good I/O\r
        cache to get good performance. Crucial for slow spinning\r
        drives (or worse, magnetic drives), but still really\r
        important for SSDs.\r
\r
\r
     ** robot_rover\r
        It’s because windows search and windows compatibility\r
        telemetry are currently using 100% or ur hard disk time\r
\r
\r
  ** JackCourtney\r
     Not a game, but GIMP loads so much faster on linux than windows\r
\r
     ** 8bitcerberus\r
        Pretty much all of them, GIMP, Krita, Inkscape, Scribus,\r
        Kdenlive, Blender, etc. Faster than Windows and way faster\r
        than OS X. Blender is probably the closest I've seen between\r
        the 3 OSes, but it's still measurably faster on Linux, the\r
        others though, there's no contest.\r
\r
\r
     ** pooerh\r
        Yeah that's probably mostly because you have gtk libs in\r
        shared memory from either other open apps or even your entire\r
        DE, while GIMP is the only thing that needs them on Windows.\r
\r
        ** one_is_the_loneliest\r
           Don't Windows apps typically bundle their own deps, so\r
           you'll end up with several of the same dep in memory at a\r
           time?\r
           However, libraries are typically pretty small, so I'm\r
           guessing it doesn't explain most of the difference, but\r
           it's certainly a contributor.\r
\r
           ** pooerh\r
              Whole UI libraries like gtk or Qt are pretty big\r
              actually, which is why they usually start slower on\r
              Windows than on Linux. Most Windows apps are written\r
              using either Win32 API or .net and these aren't bundled\r
              with apps, these usually start up pretty quickly.\r
\r
              ** one_is_the_loneliest\r
                 Huh, I just figured that Windows apps would bundle\r
                 their UI libs, but I guess that makes sense.\r
\r
\r
\r
\r
\r
  ** Swiftpaw22\r
     Now, maybe they're not comparing fresh load to fresh load, but\r
     it wouldn't at all surprise me if it was true when comparing\r
     second+ load to second+ load as Linux has always shined very\r
     brightly when it came to caching games to RAM better than\r
     Windows. Secondary loads in most of the games I've seen load\r
     faster than on Windows.\r
\r
     ** pdp10\r
        Both the Linux storage I/O subsystem and the Linux\r
        filesystems themselves are known to be faster than Windows\r
        NTFS.\r
        On the majority of modern games you don't see much of a\r
        difference, though, because the assets are packed into\r
        ordered binary files and then memory-mapped. In a way, the\r
        devs are working around something of a Windows weakness by\r
        doing that (though it's a performance win in general).\r
        That's a common pattern -- developers architect the game to\r
        work around Windows weaknesses, and of course don't take\r
        advantage of the strengths on Linux/POSIX. In principle\r
        someone could go the other direction, and design for some of\r
        POSIX/Linux strengths; I've pondered the topic in posts here\r
        before but neither I nor anyone else has a coherent thesis on\r
        the topic yet.\r
\r
        ** s0v3r1gn\r
           The largest differences between EXT4 and NTFS that affects\r
           the I/O are the maximum cluster size and the\r
           “allocate-on-flush” method of allocating disk space.\r
           The latest version of NTFS substantially increased the\r
           maximum cluster size and both the cluster size and the\r
           “allocate-on-flush” method are substantially less\r
           impactful on loading times on SSDs than they were on HDDs.\r
           The largest difference in load times is probably caused by\r
           Windows memory management being far more zealous in\r
           purging garbage.\r
\r
           ** piotrj3\r
              This. On loading screen there is a lot of memory\r
              allocation and thread creation and so on and this is\r
              where linux is faster.\r
\r
\r
\r
        ** Tom2Die\r
           I've pondered the topic in posts here before but neither I\r
           nor anyone else has a coherent thesis on the topic yet.\r
           I have faith that some day when you mature a bit more and\r
           become a PDP-11 you'll find the answers you seek.\r
\r
           ** pdp10\r
              And drop 20 bits from the word?\r
\r
              ** Tom2Die\r
                 Wait, did they really? There must be a good reason,\r
                 but I'm not too familiar with older tech.\r
\r
                 ** pdp10\r
                    The short version is that the PDP-10 is a very\r
                    large 36-bit mainframe, and the PDP-11 is a\r
                    16-bit minicomputer that only took up a couple of\r
                    racks originally -- a small fraction of the\r
                    physical size. Even thought the model lines sound\r
                    similar, they were very different product lines\r
                    that were used for different purposes.\r
                    PDP-11s were the second model of computer to run\r
                    Unix, and the place where most of Unix was\r
                    invented. Only PDP-11s ran Unix until the late\r
                    1970s. Later, the most popular hardware to run\r
                    Unix were VAXes, the 32-bit replacement for the\r
                    venerable PDP-11s. DEC didn't really like it when\r
                    customers bought their hardware but not their\r
                    operating systems. Unix never ran on 36-bit\r
                    machines. The big tens are rather unique in\r
                    history.\r
                    However, the command-line syntax was quite\r
                    similar on all of the DEC operating systems.\r
                    Kildall used much of it in CP/M, and through that\r
                    path, much of it went into DOS. DOS also\r
                    inherited a bit of syntax from Xenix, which\r
                    Microsoft had licensed a year or two prior to the\r
                    IBM PC project.\r
                    Microsoft wanted to license Xenix to the\r
                    different OEM computer manufacturers, and sell\r
                    their apps for Xenix in addition to other\r
                    operating systems, prior to the IBM PC\r
                    opportunity falling into their laps. Microsoft\r
                    did continue to make apps for other operating\r
                    systems, most fervently MacOS, the home of Excel.\r
                    Word was on Xenix first, and only much later came\r
                    to the Mac and to the fledgling Windows.\r
                    Unix was originally invented for gaming and word\r
                    processing, and Microsoft Word was originally\r
                    made for Unix. History is stranger than you\r
                    think.\r
\r
                    ** Tom2Die\r
                       The odd thing is that at one point in time I\r
                       knew most of that, but it's the sort of trivia\r
                       that if one doesn't engage with it it just\r
                       vanishes from memory without notice.\r
\r
\r
\r
\r
\r
\r
\r
  ** ihjyuhgyhhg\r
     Can confirm, witcher 3 and GTA sa loading on Linux is\r
     unbelievably faster than windows.\r
\r
     ** sixsupersonic\r
        Which is interesting considering those are windows games\r
        running in wine.\r
\r
        ** ihjyuhgyhhg\r
           Exactly and also w3 runs at 24fps compared to 29fps on\r
           windows. It was already amazing that game was working but\r
           this. Linux is future.\r
\r
\r
\r
  ** airspeedmph\r
     Not surprised, I have an old X-Plane benchmark where you can see\r
     also a striking difference in loading times (link at the\r
     respective test):\r
     [1]https://youtu.be/M5ygXe9fWR4?t=12\r
     I also see very long loading times on Windows for Arma3, Rust\r
     and a couple of others, so yeah, not surprised.\r
     Edit TL;DW: X-Plane scenery and all loading in 00:56 min for\r
     SteamOS and 02:33 min for Windows.\r
     \r
     \r
     \r
     \r
     [1] https://youtu.be/M5ygXe9fWR4?t=12\r
\r
  ** Leopard1907\r
     Well , that is a known perk of Linux\r
     Once upon a time PenguinRecordings ( a Youtube channel ) was\r
     doing Linux game benchmarks.\r
     He was always comparing load times on Linux vs Windows. Let it\r
     be Feral ports or something else , always Linux was faster one.\r
\r
     ** Two-Tone-\r
        PenguinRecordings\r
        I miss his benchmarks. :c\r
\r
        ** Leopard1907\r
           Yeah , i also miss.\r
           His enthusiasm was really something else.\r
           Right after doing Doom 2016 via Wine video , he gone mute.\r
\r
           ** Swiftpaw22\r
              Yep, sad, wonder what happened to him. Sounds like it\r
              may have been a side project while he was in school.\r
\r
              ** Leopard1907\r
                 I hope he is enjoying SteamPlay like we do and\r
                 living his life. :)\r
\r
                 ** Swiftpaw22\r
                    That doesn't mean we don't still need Linux game\r
                    benchmarking. At least we have Phoronix and a few\r
                    other youtube channels that do it somewhat.\r
\r
\r
\r
\r
\r
\r
  ** mykro76\r
     ITT - many apps and games do load faster on Linux.\r
     This seems like something worth promoting to game devs as a\r
     benefit of developing on Linux. How much time must they spend\r
     staring at their own loading screen when tweaking and testing\r
     their game?\r
\r
     ** Swiftpaw22\r
        Good point!\r
\r
\r
  ** ThenewLore\r
     If it only would load the actual missions and not crash on the\r
     mission title...\r
\r
  ** Atlas__risen\r
     I noticed a big improvement in FFXV on Linux vs Windows as well.\r
\r
  ** Offensive_joke_lord\r
     My windows-using friend is always so impressed by how fast my\r
     games load. Well, it's happened twice, once with invisible inc\r
     and once with crusader kings II. I'm pretty sure his computer is\r
     better spec-wise as well\r
\r
     ** Swiftpaw22\r
        On the first load, or subsequent loads, or all loads? Because\r
        Linux generally seems faster to load all games on subsequent\r
        loads at least, but also sometimes on first loads as well.\r
\r
        ** Offensive_joke_lord\r
           Both first loads actually, we only play, and have only\r
           played, those games together at my house\r
           P.S. (yes, they're both singleplayer haha, we have fun\r
           playing singleplayer games and exchanging the controls.)\r
           P.P.S. (we even divide controls, one time we had 3 people\r
           and we played the binding of isaac where one person moved,\r
           one attacked, and the other used items)\r
\r
           ** Swiftpaw22\r
              Cool, and sounds fun, playing together is always best!\r
              :3\r
\r
\r
\r
        ** Greydmiyu\r
           For me it is both. But that is because when I dumped Win10\r
           off my gaming rig I purposely went the LVM route so I\r
           could clear off my largely unused SSD and make it a\r
           [1]cache for my HDD.\r
           The problem I had before was that I would get a game, put\r
           it on the SSD for fast loading, then move on to another\r
           game and not swap the games out from the SSD. With LVM\r
           using the SSD as a cache anything I use often gets loaded\r
           onto the SSD. If it ever fills up stuff I've stopped using\r
           gets removed from SSD. No need for me to manage it\r
           manually.\r
           Recently it has been Warframe and World of Warcraft that\r
           take up the bulk of my time. From boot to shutdown about\r
           80-90% of my file-system calls hit the SSD. I have a 120Gb\r
           cache for a 2Tb drive and so far it's only about 60%\r
           utilized.\r
           A few months of that without touching the Win10 drive I\r
           still have sitting there and I can drop the cache, add the\r
           1Tb of space to my volume, expand my file system, put the\r
           cache back on and have a 3Tb seamless logical volume to\r
           play with. :)\r
           \r
           \r
           \r
           \r
           [1]\r
           https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2014/05/22/using-lvms-new-cache-\r
           feature/\r
\r
           ** Swiftpaw22\r
              The problem I had before was that I would get a game,\r
              put it on the SSD for fast loading, then move on to\r
              another game and not swap the games out from the SSD.\r
              With LVM using the SSD as a cache anything I use often\r
              gets loaded onto the SSD. If it ever fills up stuff\r
              I've stopped using gets removed from SSD. No need for\r
              me to manage it manually.\r
              I was about to ask wtf the point of this would be, lol,\r
              but that clears things up, thanks!\r
              I guess since RAM is more expensive than a SSD, having\r
              the SSD cache things makes sense as long as RAM is\r
              still used first and foremost for file caching.\r
              \r
              have a 3Tb seamless logical volume to play with\r
              As long as you have a backup somewhere of all your\r
              important stuff! Since HDDs are big and cheap I prefer\r
              just using one big one. Hell, there are 10TB ones out\r
              now and higher.\r
\r
              ** Greydmiyu\r
                 As long as you have a backup somewhere of all your\r
                 important stuff! Since HDDs are big and cheap I\r
                 prefer just using one big one. Hell, there are 10TB\r
                 ones out now and higher.\r
                 These are the two largest drives I have. I used to\r
                 have Win10 on the 1TB and used the 2TB to record\r
                 gaming videos. When I wanted to switch I realized I\r
                 could just drop Linux on the 2TB drive and have the\r
                 1TB Win10 to fall back to if my litmus test for\r
                 Linux wasn't passed this time around (Warframe & WoW\r
                 being playable).\r
                 Being able to merge the 1TB into the file system is\r
                 just an added bonus for when I'm ready to get rid of\r
                 the safety blanket. Been a month and I think I've\r
                 thought about booting to that drive... once? But the\r
                 desire to try Destiny 2 again passed. :)\r
\r
\r
\r
\r
\r
  ** yoshi314\r
     too bad this beta won't load its own saves. i am reluctant to\r
     replay game from scratch again, because neither autosaves nor my\r
     manual saves will load.\r
\r
     ** Dakkaface\r
        Haven't have that issue myself, it's been working for me\r
        aside from some graphical glitches. Hopefully they get it\r
        working for everyone soon.\r
\r
\r
  ** MJBrune\r
     I will say while I do think there is some sort of faster load on\r
     linux, one user randomly staying on a forum shouldn't really be\r
     big news and certainly shouldn't be held as true to any real\r
     means.\r
\r
     ** Swiftpaw22\r
        Linux loading times being faster for many games, especially\r
        during 2nd+ loads, is 100% confirmed. As for this particular\r
        game, other users have confirmed the same thing within this\r
        very post.\r
        So, while wanting evidence is amiable, we already have it.\r
\r
        ** MJBrune\r
           I mean sure. And there are plenty of benchmarks to show\r
           it. I just think "10 times" is a bit excessive and random.\r
           I dunno. Am not trying to crap on your joke either.\r
\r
           ** Swiftpaw22\r
              I don't know how accurate "10" is hehe, but some of the\r
              benchmark videos show huge differences, so I totally\r
              get someone say "10 times faster". But we don't have to\r
              be overly anal, they just mean it's "much faster" I'm\r
              sure, and that much is confirmed.\r
              Nothing against anal. :3\r
\r
\r
\r
\r
\r