Slashdot Mirror
Beta BeOS R5 OpenGL Benchmarks Smoke Linux and Win
BigZaphod writes: "BeNews has a story up that compares GLQuake and Quake2(GL) on BeOS R5 to Windows and Linux (Corel). They compare stats using a Voodoo2, Voodoo3, and a Matrox G200. BeOS wins almost every round -- sometimes by huge margins." Update: 06/19 09:06 by CT : several people pointed out that they did the tests under XF86 3.3 which of course is not an even remotely fast 3D platform. Restesting at the very least under XF86 4 w/ DRI would be necessary to get a fair comparison.
The above poster is either aggressively misinformed, or is deliberately attempting to misinform.
We do not drop triangles. If we do, it is a bug and we'd like to know about it.
Unlike Micros~1, we are not interested in cheating and fudging benchmarks and issuing misleading press releases and pre-announcing non-existent products. We are trying to beat the crap out of Windoze by simply being better than Windoze. With the amazing OpenGL work Jason has done, we're getting closer...
Schwab
Be, Inc.
Currently working on Intel 810 OpenGL driver
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
Stuff like this makes me wonder how much of Be's youth has to do with it.
... anyone have any similar thoughts?
..
Younger, leaner code, et al
I do remember using a preview copy of Be 1 and trying out that terrain demo on a PowerPC. Seeing a mac render so many polygons at one time at full 35fps almost gave me a heart attack. I dont know the details of why Be is so good on the graphics side, but it looks like its still the same way
"Old man yells at systemd"
Although I agree that BeOS has a screaming advantage over Windows or Linux, it's the Windows/Linux difference that disturbs me.
Seeing as they used Corel Linux, they probably did not bother getting any real hardware state-of-the-art Linux drivers. The reason for this is not just Linux-trolling!
The Linux Games article compared Linux and Windows performance, and got much better results for Windows vs. Linux.
Just a nit-pick:
If they are only comparing Quake speeds, you can hardly call it a comparison of OpenGL implementations. Quake and Quake-based games use a relatively TINY portion of the OpenGL API.
If run at high resolutions, the tests are basically testing the hardware's fill rate, and at lower resolutions, they are testing the drivers' geometry rates--definitely nowhere near a comprehensive "OpenGL benchmark".
Perhaps the headline, "Quake faster on BeOS" would be more appropriate...
Actually, its designed as a good OS. Multimedia OS is just something the marketing droids call it because it sounds cool, and its a good niche for a wonderful operating system.
BeOS is from the ground up, a beautifully thought out and put-together operating system. I don't believe an open source development process could have created such a result. I also don't believe Micro$oft will ever catch up without completely ditching their entire codebase and starting fresh. Hey they tried to do just that thing with NT (in collaboration with IBM), but we can all see how well that turned out.
I don't mean to this to sound like flamebait, so I apologize. I just want to make the point that BeOS is designed as a single user desktop OS with a first rate filing system, process and memory management and a clean interface to boot. That makes it great for writing music or working with graphics or whatever simply because they tax the parts of an OS which BeOS is particularly well designed. BeOS capabilities with different types of media is a result of its design, not the other way around.
Spyky