Define what you mean by smoothest. PopOS and SalientOS do have some software related to gaming preinstalled by default. You can however customize any distribution to your liking, as well as adding custom kernels that can increase your gaming performance. These tools that are preinstalled on these distributions listed above aren't distro exclusive but rather distro agnostic.

Last edited by Jared on 27 Jul 2020 at 5:58 pm UTC

Quoting: GuestWhat do you mean with "smoothest"? No Lags and such? How easy something is?

Anyway i would say: Every Distro can be "smooth". If you want the most out of your Distro you should go with Gentoo. But thats however not that easy as other distros. If you want a low resource system that can also be any Distro with any WM or a Lightweight DE such as XFCE for example. Depending on your Hardware you might need the latest Kernel in that case something like Manjaro / Arch / Gentoo would be good anything which is a Rolling Release Distro really. If you just want a simple click and go Distro i would suggest either Ubuntu / POP OS / Linux Mint / Manjaro and so on.

TLDR: Any Distro can be "smooth" and good. It just depends on your needs.

As long as the compositor is disabled for the given desktop environment or window manager, you shouldn't be seeing any loss of framerates. KDE, for example, disables its compositor by default, when gaming.

I just read something Like this

This Morning and it was explainning how POP os 19.04 was such native to Games and Steam

Quoting: firesI just read something Like this

This Morning and it was explainning how POP os 19.04 was such native to Games and Steam

With the two major exception being AMD's open source graphics drivers and advancements of wine on its newer versions, there shouldn't be much differences in the performance of games between distributions. I'm not saying all distributions are created equally as newer packages are generally preferred to than older ones. Hence why Debian Stable, Slackware static release version and CentOS aren't recommended as gaming distros. Ubuntu based distros and Arch based ones are typically recommended due to having the most support in this category, though Void, Gentoo and Solus can also suffice. With Gentoo, in particular, the problem is that you have to compile the packages which in itself is time consuming unless you have a beastly PC and the performance difference is usually non-existant in most cases, with the best scenario resulting in an increase of 1-2 fps. When people say PopOS is good for gaming, they don't mean that the results cannot be replicated on other distribution. They are mainly talking about its ease of use with most of the programs or software or drivers associated with gaming on Linux being preinstalled on PopOS or SalientOS.

Gaming ? FULLSCREEN EXLUSİVE ? KDE PLASMA wins.

Quoting: Jared

Quoting: firesI just read something Like this

This Morning and it was explainning how POP os 19.04 was such native to Games and Steam

With the two major exception being AMD's open source graphics drivers and advancements of wine on its newer versions, there shouldn't be much differences in the performance of games between distributions. I'm not saying all distributions are created equally as newer packages are generally preferred to than older ones. Hence why Debian Stable, Slackware static release version and CentOS aren't recommended as gaming distros. Ubuntu based distros and Arch based ones are typically recommended due to having the most support in this category, though Void, Gentoo and Solus can also suffice. With Gentoo, in particular, the problem is that you have to compile the packages which in itself is time consuming unless you have a beastly PC and the performance difference is usually non-existant in most cases, with the best scenario resulting in an increase of 1-2 fps. When people say PopOS is good for gaming, they don't mean that the results cannot be replicated on other distribution. They are mainly talking about its ease of use with most of the programs or software or drivers associated with gaming on Linux being preinstalled on PopOS or SalientOS.

Yes

thats exactly what i meant

Quoting: KuduzkehpanKDE PLASMA

I never had any Luck with KDE

i just dont know i tried installing 2 times and it just did not work for me

i liked very much openbox

I've always had excellent performance with games in Kubuntu

I think for Gaming the most important point is recent packages, so I would always recommend a rolling release distro (Arch (and derivates such as Manjaro), Gentoo etc.), because on Debian, Ubuntu etc. you got such old packages, some describe it as "rotten".

Recent packages will contain fixes, new features and performance improvements etc.

For easier setup you can also use programs like Lutris on these rolling release systems, so I don't see any advantage in "stable" distros.

The only difference is probably the system setup itself.
That can be a bit easier on "stable" distros, but this is also not always given.
Some people seem to hate tweaking configs so much, that even a one-liner is too much.
That said even on Arch it is fairly easy to setup everything, for example: just install the gpu driver packages (in my case: nvidia) and your gpu works.

Quoting: dr_jekyllI think for Gaming the most important point is recent packages, so I would always recommend a rolling release distro (Arch (and derivates such as Manjaro), Gentoo etc.), because on Debian, Ubuntu etc. you got such old packages, some describe it as "rotten".

Recent packages will contain fixes, new features and performance improvements etc.

For easier setup you can also use programs like Lutris on these rolling release systems, so I don't see any advantage in "stable" distros.

The only difference is probably the system setup itself.
That can be a bit easier on "stable" distros, but this is also not always given.
Some people seem to hate tweaking configs so much, that even a one-liner is too much.
That said even on Arch it is fairly easy to setup everything, for example: just install the gpu driver packages (in my case: nvidia) and your gpu works.

This is a common misconception from people that don't use Ubuntu or one of its derivatives.

The kernel and Mesa get regular updates through the Hardware Enablement stack. The Nvidia drivers get updated through the Stable Release Updates, the same as browsers and such. All packages get security patches and bugfixes backported over the course of the support period. Steam updates itself, obviously.

If you want software with newer features, there are PPAs, snaps, flatpaks, and appimages.

Gaming rigs aren't desperate for bleeding-edge LibreOffice.

People that want to use a rolling-release distro should definitely do so, but it is absolutely not the case that people that want to game must use a rolling-release distro.

Where are the evidences? Most of all you share an opinion, not facts. You should do a benchmark in order to compare several distro and get results as FPS or score of superposition. After that, we will really discuss. :smile:

It's about experience. Some who don't know that they need anything newer, could start using stock Ubuntu with old kernels and then complain about it (or in better case, try to figure out what's going on). Once people get experience, they don't need to ask questions what is better, a rolling distro or a stable distro with newer kernels and such. They can figure it out themselves already.

So just using Ubuntu out of the box is not a guarantee of the best result, if people don't know that they actually don't know about something. I think starting with a rolling distro is a better learning exercise overall. Both approaches have their benefits and downsides.

Last edited by Shmerl on 10 Sep 2020 at 4:54 am UTC

Facts to elevate the discuss:

Benchmark of 8 distros:
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=spring-2020-distros&num=2
Benchmark of 11 distros:
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=10980xe-intel-linux&num=1

It will interesting to estimate or extrapolate the impact in game with 40 FPS.

From my personal experience latest Pop!_OS with Feral's gamemode enabled for each game that works with it. Also kernel updated to latest 5.8 and latest mesa-git.

I've played on Fedora and Manjaro as well, although they performed FINE, it wasn't nearly as good as Pop!_OS is for some reason, those guys really do quite a few optimizations for OS to run great.

To me, smoother, it relates to the amount of work I need to put with workarounds, adding extra repos, etc to make run the games that I like. In this case, so far, fedora has been the winner.

Quoting: CatKillerThis is a common misconception from people that don't use Ubuntu or one of its derivatives.

I used many distros and as a former Debian user I know the situation very well.
Of course they implemented measures over the years to backport newer software, because otherwise they could not keep up at all, but that's just a fake and incomplete solution.

Besides missing features etc., this whole situation is a security risk.
And all just because people are to lazy to update, thus microsoft implemented update enforcement :tongue:.
I guess we will get to the point where goverments will enforce using newer software, because of the IT-security nightmare we are in now.

Quoting: CatKillerAll packages get security patches and bugfixes backported over the course of the support period. Steam updates itself, obviously.

Thats sadly not the true situation, I read this claim a lot, but just take a look at all packages that are not among the most used ones.
They don't get updates, not even for severe security holes.
All the distros simply don't have the manpower for this.
Thats what people mean with "rotten".
And if you assume that at least some packages get security updates, what does that mean?
Think about it:
1. How do you even recognize all security relevant updates?
I will tell you, they simply ignore most things and fix only the worst ones, if it is fixed at all.
2. not all patches can be backported,
3. what is the definition of security updates? I once talked to some debian maintainers, and they told me that certain security relevant bugs are not fixed, because they are not severe enough (!) in their view.

I think stable distros are worse (feature and performance wise) and also a security risk.
So I don't recommend them at all and it bothers me that everyone always recommends Ubuntu to newbies, it's not the best distro at all.

Quoting: CatKillerIf you want software with newer features, there are PPAs, snaps, flatpaks, and appimages.

And thats far more complicated, less convenient, lacks features & packages and is prone to compatiblity issues than simply using a rolling release distro :wink:.

---

Quoting: VinouchWhere are the evidences? Most of all you share an opinion, not facts. You should do a benchmark in order to compare several distro and get results as FPS or score of superposition. After that, we will really discuss.

As mirv already said, benchmarking distros is a far too complicated task, you will never get accurate results.

You can simply assume two things:
1. The main difference between distros (especially between "stable" and rolling-relase distros) are the versions of packages.
2. Newer packages = recent features, fixes, better performance

People will always tell you some exceptions, but in the bigger picture that does not matter.

Quoting: VinouchFacts to elevate the discuss:

Benchmark of 8 distros:

In addition to the things mirv already said, you should keep in mind, that stable distros have recent packages when they are launched, but the packages will get older very fast.
So benchmarks with newly released distros are not a comparison of the real situation.

Quoting: CatKiller

Quoting: dr_jekyllI think for Gaming the most important point is recent packages, so I would always recommend a rolling release distro (Arch (and derivates such as Manjaro), Gentoo etc.), because on Debian, Ubuntu etc. you got such old packages, some describe it as "rotten".

Recent packages will contain fixes, new features and performance improvements etc.

For easier setup you can also use programs like Lutris on these rolling release systems, so I don't see any advantage in "stable" distros.

The only difference is probably the system setup itself.
That can be a bit easier on "stable" distros, but this is also not always given.
Some people seem to hate tweaking configs so much, that even a one-liner is too much.
That said even on Arch it is fairly easy to setup everything, for example: just install the gpu driver packages (in my case: nvidia) and your gpu works.

This is a common misconception from people that don't use Ubuntu or one of its derivatives.

The kernel and Mesa get regular updates through the Hardware Enablement stack. The Nvidia drivers get updated through the Stable Release Updates, the same as browsers and such. All packages get security patches and bugfixes backported over the course of the support period. Steam updates itself, obviously.

If you want software with newer features, there are PPAs, snaps, flatpaks, and appimages.

Gaming rigs aren't desperate for bleeding-edge LibreOffice.

People that want to use a rolling-release distro should definitely do so, but it is absolutely not the case that people that want to game must use a rolling-release distro.

If a person has to jump through all those hoops, especially a new user, to obtain the newest software then why recommend them a static release distribution. Also AMD drivers are better on rolling release distributions as it always gives the most up to date one.

Quoting: JaredIf a person has to jump through all those hoops, especially a new user, to obtain the newest software then why recommend them a static release distribution.

What hoops? The HWE and SRU updates happen automatically. Snaps and flatpaks are a one-click install, the same as any other package. Adding a PPA is one line that you copy-and-paste.

There's absolutely no reason why people need the highest version number of everything on their computer. The parts that are useful to have higher version numbers get updated regularly on their own on Ubuntu-based distros.

The range of distros available is intimidating to new users; people going around saying that they might make the wrong choice makes it needlessly more intimidating for them. There aren't wrong choices, and neither rolling nor non-rolling distros are inherently superior to the other. One approach is more conservative and focused, and the other approach is all-or-nothing bleeding-edge, but they're both valid.

Also AMD drivers are better on rolling release distributions as it always gives the most up to date one.

For users with a brand new AMD GPU I would more strongly recommend a rolling-release distro, yes. Users that like to tinker on an Ubuntu-based distro would have got ACO earlier than users that don't like to tinker on a rolling-release distro, though.

Flatpaks aren't installed on vanilla Ubuntu by default and most Ubuntu based distributions don't come with snaps by default. New users won't know how to enable those of they aren't installed by default. And PPAs do require you to do some extra research to check if the necessary packages are still there.
Irregardless, how is doing those methods easier than just having the most up to date packages and software on your system without the need of any extra hassle.

Quoting: VinouchFacts to elevate the discuss:

Benchmark of 8 distros:
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=spring-2020-distros&num=2
Benchmark of 11 distros:
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=10980xe-intel-linux&num=1

It will interesting to estimate or extrapolate the impact in game with 40 FPS.

Nice links so i am downloading clear linux

But cant find any sreen shots or other info Not to mention it takes for ever to open the home page

i also went to Distrowatch to check out some screen shots but no luck

i will run it from usb and see how that goes

thanks