Quoting: Solitary

Quoting: Leopard

Quoting: EhvisFor Steam Deck it would probably help greatly to skip the native port. Unlike the next two TR games, this one was still OpenGL and there are a couple of areas where framerate suffered greatly. This was way back when I still played on a GTX970, but I don't think it was the GPU that was the limiting factor. I have no desire to play this game again, so I won't be testing it.

That game was too stuttery to enjoy on Proton last time i checked.

Surely native port has some low perf issues in general, but at least it provides a mostly smooth experience.

Last time you checked might have been too long ago to be relevant. Stuttering sounds like shader issue and that has improved significantly in last few years.

Anyone is welcome to try. It was one year ago.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: EhvisFor Steam Deck it would probably help greatly to skip the native port. Unlike the next two TR games, this one was still OpenGL and there are a couple of areas where framerate suffered greatly. This was way back when I still played on a GTX970, but I don't think it was the GPU that was the limiting factor. I have no desire to play this game again, so I won't be testing it.

That game was too stuttery to enjoy on Proton last time i checked.

Surely native port has some low perf issues in general, but at least it provides a mostly smooth experience.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: jordicomaCan you install the native version? It's one of my favorite games on Linux.
I don't know for the performance, but it runs better than the last one with my gf660.
And probably I'm strange, but I prefer a slow running native game than having to run it on proton/wine and the developers no supporting Linux.
On steamdb it's still listed as Linux https://steamdb.info/app/203160/ [External Link]

Like it happened with previous Feral delistings, you still get Linux build by default.

It is just they don't offer support anymore, they also don't get any sale revenues due to their licensing deal has ended.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Fwiw, those graphical problems are Nvidia exclusive.

https://forums.developer.nvidia.com/t/native-tomb-raider-2013-regression-with-495-44-driver/194301 [External Link]

Present on drivers newer than 470, 470 and below is ok.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestIt would be nice if someone put up a performance test on youtube so we can see how well it's running right now. How good is the performance with the DXVK_ASYNC=1 option? And how does the performance currently compare to the performance in windows10.

There are currently a lot of people on windows10 who have severe fluctuations from 39 fps to over 80 fps. Is this problem also present on Linux?

I use DXVK async patch on top of DXVK master ( i've built it myself as dxvk-async repro only provides builds for releases, which GoW fixes of DXVK are not in a release, just in master )

It is just night and day difference compared to normal DXVK master.

My system is i7 7700HQ,GTX 1050.

Zero stutters with DXVK async on top of master. Lots of stutters with DXVK master.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: Leopard

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: Leopard

Quoting: Linas

Quoting: axredneckCan you add "VRAM amount" ?

Wouldn't GPU model tell you that?

Nope.

As in i use a GTX 1050 mobile, which has 2 versions. One with 4 gb vram, other is with 2 gb vram and that is the only difference.

GTX 1050 desktop only has 2 gb vram model so things are clear there.

Isn't that GTX 1050 Mobile vs GTX 1050 Ti Mobile?

No?

GTX 1050 Ti mobile are all 4 gb vram, GTX 1050 Mobile has 2 variants, one with 2 gb vram, other with 4 gb vram.

Ok, I have only seen 2GB versions of the 1050 Mobile so I assume that the 4GB one is quite rare?

Not rare. Hp, Lenovo, Asus, Acer are the ones that i know that had 1050 4GB models. In Asus's case, there was two even. One sold under the ROG family while other one is from FX series.

Probably Clevo and bunch of other brands that just puts their brand over Clevo laptops had too.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: Leopard

Quoting: Linas

Quoting: axredneckCan you add "VRAM amount" ?

Wouldn't GPU model tell you that?

Nope.

As in i use a GTX 1050 mobile, which has 2 versions. One with 4 gb vram, other is with 2 gb vram and that is the only difference.

GTX 1050 desktop only has 2 gb vram model so things are clear there.

Isn't that GTX 1050 Mobile vs GTX 1050 Ti Mobile?

No?

GTX 1050 Ti mobile are all 4 gb vram, GTX 1050 Mobile has 2 variants, one with 2 gb vram, other with 4 gb vram.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Linas

Quoting: axredneckCan you add "VRAM amount" ?

Wouldn't GPU model tell you that?

Nope.

As in i use a GTX 1050 mobile, which has 2 versions. One with 4 gb vram, other is with 2 gb vram and that is the only difference.

GTX 1050 desktop only has 2 gb vram model so things are clear there.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

https://github.com/ValveSoftware/csgo-osx-linux/issues/2871#issuecomment-993097016 [External Link]

Looks like it is fixed.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEP

Quoting: CatKillerDevelopers aren't paying for anything, customers are.

That's semantics, really.
I'd say customers give 100% of the money to the developers, which have to forward 30% of it to Valve. Or customers give 100% to Valve, which withhold 30% from the developer - that's probably more correct.
Either way, developers lose 30% of what the customers were paying for their game. The developers are the ones losing more money in that scenario than they should.
Keep in mind that taxes go on top of that, in the EU that's about 20% gone additionally (unless you add 20% to the price in VAT countries, which I don't think anyone really does).
So from the get-go you lose 50% of value. Ouch. I'd be pissed about that, too.

Did Valve develop or market that game? No. They host its data and provide some (good) service around it - which is fair to compensate, of course, but 1/3rd is excessive. 1/4th or 5th would be much more reasonable, you don't have to do the lowballing that Epic does to just cover the expenses (of the hosting/service).

Developers can go with other stores that takes a lower cut like Epic Store if they are not happy.

View this comment - View article - View full comments