Quoting: amatai.... and there is lobbying from Microsoft not to make available some pro software on Linux (like Catia, Solidworks or Abacus).

Small correction here: Abaqus is still available on Linux! And they won't get those Linux users to switch to MS-Windows easily as there's tons of processes attached to it that rely on the underlying OS. Though many CAD programs abandoned Linux the FEA world looks a little bit differently. Especially programs that have also to run on an HPC cluster (though some companies were crazy enough to try to set an HPC cluster up on MS Windows, they quickly returned to Linux).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Liam DaweWhat does "flatpak search org.freedesktop.Platform" show you?

Nothing found.
Had to re-add the flatpak-repo; or it was that I installed all the latest tumbleweed updates... Anyway, now it's working..
So my first experience with flatpak isn't very positive... another additional package manager and weird run commands to get your app started (at least it's able to place a launcher in the desktop-environment-menu; I'd have rather prefferred AppImage though)... wonder when every software developer will start to have their own app-distribution & run system...

results are interesting though: I'm getting around 11050 with Vulkan and around 10800 with OpenGL. But max FPS is higher with OpenGL (185 with OpenGL, 167 with Vulkan); it's just that it at some points drops down to 10fps for a short period, otherwise it would have received higher scores than Vulkan as their average FPS is still very close (108 OpenGL and 110 Vulkan). Benchmark done at 4K.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Liam Dawe

Quoting: peta77

Quoting: Liam Dawe

Quoting: peta77flatpak install BasemarkGPU-linux-1.2.0.flatpak

Fehler: The application com.basemark.BasemarkGPU/x86_64/master requires the runtime org.freedesktop.Platform/x86_64/19.08 which was not found

So seems they still only support ubuntu; won't work with openSUSE tumbleweed... Or they don't fully understand Linux distributions stuff yet...

Flatpaks still need certain other Flatpak "runtimes" to work, you're missing one it seems. Works fine on Manjaro as stated in the article.

Well then it at least should tell which requirement I miss. Because this:
requires the runtime org.freedesktop.Platform/x86_64/19.08
looks to me as if it is looking at specific release numbers (and that's the only thing it mentions during install) which seems to be in current range of ubuntu. You may just be lucky with manjaro that the release number is in a proper range.

It's nothing to do with Ubuntu. Ubuntu don't even go with Flatpak, they have their own packaging with Snap. You're missing the setup of the Freedesktop Flatpak runtime it needs. This a problem your end, not theirs.

Add Flathub as directed here: https://flatpak.org/setup/openSUSE/ [External Link]

I did exactly that and the previously mentioned output is what I get.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Liam Dawe

Quoting: peta77flatpak install BasemarkGPU-linux-1.2.0.flatpak

Fehler: The application com.basemark.BasemarkGPU/x86_64/master requires the runtime org.freedesktop.Platform/x86_64/19.08 which was not found

So seems they still only support ubuntu; won't work with openSUSE tumbleweed... Or they don't fully understand Linux distributions stuff yet...

Flatpaks still need certain other Flatpak "runtimes" to work, you're missing one it seems. Works fine on Manjaro as stated in the article.

Well then it at least should tell which requirement I miss. Because this:
requires the runtime org.freedesktop.Platform/x86_64/19.08
looks to me as if it is looking at specific release numbers (and that's the only thing it mentions during install) which seems to be in current range of ubuntu. You may just be lucky with manjaro that the release number is in a proper range.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

flatpak install BasemarkGPU-linux-1.2.0.flatpak

Fehler: The application com.basemark.BasemarkGPU/x86_64/master requires the runtime org.freedesktop.Platform/x86_64/19.08 which was not found

So seems they still only support ubuntu; won't work with openSUSE tumbleweed... Or they don't fully understand Linux distributions stuff yet...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: 14....
I don't personally think it's worth adding. The dual-boot question could be changed to "Do you use the same computer for Windows gaming as well?"

Is it really important if it's the same computer or not?
A more interesting result could be the answer to: Do you also play games on Windows/PS/...? And: If yes, which is your favourite / most used platform?
Could be interesting... or not .... I'm just curios....

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: PatolaThis is a real question, not trolling: is there an actual gaming element to Universe Sandbox? Like, any game mechanics, campaigns or objectives? It always seemed to be just a toolbox for physics, with the initial "gamey" part just an excuse for the user to get acquainted with the controls and possibilities of the engine. Nothing like, say, Kerbal Space Program.

I'd say: No.
It's just a very decent astrophysics simulator with a nice interface so you can easily mess around with planets, a solar system, the universe and everything.
There's a lot of predefined scenarios where you can have a closer look at some real historical events and examples of theoretical events. You can either look at how the universe works (planets, stars, galaxies, etc. interact) or you can create your own one (including playing around with some physical constants).

But there's nothing like missions or anything like it. Tutorials to get you started, but that's it. It's some sort of astro-physical sandbox if you're interested in that kind of stuff.

Regarding the state of it: I'd say it has the quality of a production/release version and it gets constantly updated with new features (for free! no DLCs! so far...).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ShmerlDepends on the game. dxvk for example uses a percentage of all available cores for some tasks. So if something is CPU bound and can be parallelized, good games will parallelize it according to available hardware.

As long as it's not using those cores at almost 100% it's just task scheduling and core cycling to reduce heat in each single core. If your system load isn't close to you number of logical cores, it doesn't really use them and you'd be fine with a lot fewer of them.

Quoting: ShmerlGames using a few cores is a thing of the past, before Vulkan was a thing. Single core performance is oversold, it doesn't matter as much as it did in the previous decade.

Vulkan allows parallel access to the driver, but actual communication to the GPU is still sequential. So, if you have lots of pre-processing done on the CPU which can be done in many threads, it will help. If not, the performance gain can stall very quickly and adding more cores won't change anything.

Quoting: ShmerlAnd you can say goodbye to Intel's high frequency of individual cores, once they'll switch to smaller node process. Physics will dictate such limitation. So get used to what AMD are already doing now, Intel will have no choice but to deal with the same reality.

I'm not trying to belittle AMDs accomplishments, what I wanted to emphasize is that every benchmark has to be taken with a grain of salt. There was no judgement or anything like it intended. Just that you should take a closer look at marketing statements before making a decision to buy.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Well, though it sounds impressive at first, there's always that thing about benchmarks.....
So that thing has 64 Cores physical (128 logical).. How many are used by a game? Not a lot, my 8 cores (+HT) have never been fully used by any game that I know/played. They're are nice for compiling, ray-tracing, video encoding, number crunching though.. And that's exactly the use case of many cores (and even more so for many CPUs); and that's also what is presented in their benchmarks all along. None of them is about gaming.

So as games tend to use very few cores (due to limitations in algorithms, hardware access, etc.) the single core performance is very important us (we're here for gaming, right?). Let's have a look what that might be (couldn't check my own CPU; tried to install the blender benchmark, but the download stalls somewhere in the middle :( ) :

AMD 3990X: 64/128 (physical/logical) cores:
44s real -> 2816s / 5632s CPU

Liam (i7 5960x): 8/16 cores
210s real -> 1680s / 3360s CPU

Ergo: the single core performance of the i7 5960x is about two thirds higher (5632 / 3360 = 1,6762) than that of the AMD 3990X. (Well, that's when assuming the problem & algorithm & parallelization scale linearly of course!)

Does it look less impressive now? Well, it depends. Do you want to setup a pure build server, render farm, number cruncher or something similar? That thing might be something for you. Do you want to have a pure gaming machine? Well, expect your performance to drop a bit as most games can't make use of so many cores. Do you need a hybrid, running games while having some heavy jobs in the background (as Liam mentioned as a use case) and not expecting best performance - compared to other current high end CPUs - in the game? This might be something you might consider.

So in the end it's like always, benchmarks - especially in press announcements - always sound nice, but you still have to check if they apply to your use case and find a benchmark which checks your usage to make a proper decision.

Hope that helps to relieve the sadness of those who too quickly wished to have that thing...

I'd want that case though, but as it seems they're not selling it separately... And it's lacking some space for all my hard drives anyway...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Wow, that's very nice of them. :woot:
At least a couple of the tools referenced are also supported on Linux. So time to hopefully get new / additional insights. Well, after the downloads done, this thing truly is huge :O ... And this Lunar New Year Sale is already massively blocking my download queue... So this will take a while before it can be enjoyed....

View this comment - View article - View full comments