/ Sign-up
Your question

Linux Gaming Details??

  • Fedora
  • Ubuntu
Last response: in Open Source Software
March 7, 2011 6:42:20 PM

Trying to decide between Fedora VS Ubuntu for my new HD. I've used both and can't say much of a difference. I do plan to use it for gaming Steam based & Window based games so I have a few questions.

Fedora VS Ubuntu which would you pick?

I think Fedora is much more stable and more professional looking, but ubuntu does have a very large community for help.

I know linux is pretty much the same, but there is some differences. I really liked ubuntu, but fedora looks very clean which i like.

Thinks i'm considering are:

64bit OS

Intention of Gaming

Supporting GTX275 Nvidia card

Used for some Remote Desktop viewing

Also question on Emulators (wine cedega ect..)

Anyway to speed up wine/cedaga/ect.. ? is it mostly Processor based or GUI?


More about : linux gaming details

March 7, 2011 7:00:36 PM

Honestly, for gaming, just use Windows. I hate saying that but it is the cold hard truth. Mainstream games on Linux are an ordeal.

STEAM works pretty well under WINE. Actual GAMES? Not so much. It's very, very hit and miss what works, what won't work and what sort of will work with another sweat equity on your part.

As far as the argument between Ubuntu and Fedora, flip a coin. Either is an equally bad choice in this case.
March 7, 2011 7:16:04 PM

This is for a Linux Distro, WIndows or dual boot isn't a option i'm willing to consider.

Thanks for the quick feedback though.

I have previously run WoW and Steam games through Ubuntu before and ran like a charm.

It's a matter of patience and that I have plenty of. Besides if we dont support the linux community companies won't bother making games for Linux.

Related resources
March 7, 2011 11:33:12 PM

I'm only just using Fedora on a virtual machine, and I've burned a few ubuntu disks to use as rescue CD's in the past. That's about the extent of my personal experience with either, but I'd use Fedora. Ubuntu has made some choices lately that have not been very popular with people, and I'm inclined to agree. Fedora also stems from RedHat linux which I used back in the day and really liked.

Wine has the best support of community, unless you want to pay for CodeWeavers, but that kinda defeats the point of not using windows, yes? A website recently ran tests on an ubuntu install running some opengl games. If I can find where it was, I'll post the link. Basically it tested native linux, wine under linux and native windows framerates all on the same computer and hardware. As I recall, it basically came down to the game and its particular implementation. The games that will run best under linux, natively or under wine are opengl based graphics, anything that requires directx for graphics, it'll be spotty at best.
March 8, 2011 5:58:29 AM

c911darkwolf said:
I know linux is pretty much the same, but there is some differences. I really liked ubuntu, but fedora looks very clean which i like.

You could simply change the theme on either distro. Ubuntu should ship with the stock GNOME theme (a la Windows 95) or something close to it but more polished, like Clearlooks perhaps.
March 8, 2011 1:35:09 PM

ubuntu vs fedora...

installer packages, ubuntu uses debs and fedora uses rpms. I'm not 100% sure but I can guess that Wine is probably offered in both. But there might be some applications that you like that aren't (browsers, music/video players, etc..) so you might wanna check them both

Ubuntu Software Center is kinda nice too, although I also have to admit that I haven't used Fedora in a while and during the time that I did, I didn't have root access so I don't have much installing experience

On this same note, I have a Nvdia gtx 460 and driver installation in Ubuntu was easy through the Additional Drivers app (jockey). I'm not sure how Fedora handles this so you might wanna look at that too

And as someone19 noted before, Ubuntu tends to be a bit bloated with packaged software by default. If you're planning on going this route, you might also wanna look at lighter Ubuntu/debian based distros such as Mint, Xubuntu, Lubuntu, crunchbang, etc..
March 9, 2011 11:56:27 PM

I use Fedora. Fedora is good, but may require the use of the terminal or config files to get what you want (if you want to change things).
March 10, 2011 12:54:48 PM

Why limit yourself to those two distros? The catch is you want 64-bit. Read about a better alternative here -- and here --

"Open Your Mind" and remember -- Linux is not just ubuntu!

Discover the freedom that is linux.

For gaming one probably wants both CrossOver and WINE

:hello:  Aloha!
March 10, 2011 3:45:14 PM

Well, in his/her defense, Ubuntu/Fedora are widely used and have huge communities to draw upon for help. Since the intent is gaming, which is hit-and-miss at best, I can't fault them for wanting to stay as much in the Linux mainstream as possible. No harm no foul there!

That said, +2 for Sabayon. :bounce:  I'm using it right this moment as a VM. If I hadn't spent most of yesterday afternoon repairing GRUB on my computer, I might actually install it to use proper, but I 've had enough of software fail for the week. :lol: 

March 10, 2011 5:24:13 PM

Well if we want to start recommending the wild I'm using and have been using Gentoo for years, has a good community (just disregard the flamewars, they blow over eventually), and you get to configure everything; its not for a noob however. There is ample documentation for most everything, but you should know a thing or two about linux before jumping in with two feet.
March 10, 2011 9:43:41 PM

No offense but compiling(even it compiles automatically) could be boring sometimes. Especially on old pc with huge software(open office comes to mind).But i know Gentoo is a great distro.

And i can suggest ArchLinux. You configure everything yourself like Gentoo but without compiling. But you can do it easily with ABS(Arch Build System).
March 10, 2011 11:14:51 PM

True, the compiling can be tedious, but automated; the advantage is you can set compiler flags to customize to your hardware and chipset. That way the software won't need to be i486 compatible, and the object file and linked libraries won't be bloated by instructions that will never get used, thusly smaller, faster and have 'an edge.'

Personally, I like how its a continuous update without versions and how fast the latest packages are added to the tree.

Best solution

March 11, 2011 5:47:56 PM

You are right, playing with contemporary h/w and games takes quite a bit of patience on Linux. You will be setting up/fixing quite a bit of stuff yourself and all of it won't come from the distro.

I am biased here, but I'd say Debian testing. You do lose some initial convenience, but since you're already familiar with Linux and have a lot of patience, I think you could easily walk the learning curve deeper into linux land.

The advantages of this choice:

1) You can set up things yourself quite a bit, without much automatic configuration or distro specific things getting in the way (granted Arch Linux and Gentoo offer more here, but I think they lose out in some other respects).
2) You are still within the Linux mainstream. Also, the Debian community is huge and the distro has a pretty good standing, and is respected for its quality.
3) There is still some convenience. Like apt-get.
4) Debian has a huge set of packages available which you don't need to compile yourself (with say Arch Linux, you have the Arch User Repository, which has a lot of stuff, requires that you compile it, and is not officially supported).
5) Debian Testing is rather bleeding edge, because they don't require months long testing periods for every package they accept into the distro. If you want to do exotic things (such as gaming, when talking Linux) and support new hardware, you don't want to run old stuff, which you in my experience would encounter on Ubuntu or Debian Stable at least. Downside is that stuff might break majorly at times, but you said you're patient :) 
6) Ubuntu is based on Debian, so lots of advice that is relevant for Ubuntu could work for Debian as well.
7) Debian takes the free software aspect very seriously so if that is important for you, it might be a consideration.

My bias? I went with Debian testing myself some 10-11 years ago, also emphasizing gaming on a Linux-only box :)  Later when Loki Games went down and native mainstream games stopped coming out for linux I kind of gave up. Currently I run Arch Linux as my primary linux distro.
March 12, 2011 6:15:08 AM

someone19 said:
True, the compiling can be tedious, but automated; the advantage is you can set compiler flags to customize to your hardware and chipset. That way the software won't need to be i486 compatible, and the object file and linked libraries won't be bloated by instructions that will never get used, thusly smaller, faster and have 'an edge.'

Personally, I like how its a continuous update without versions and how fast the latest packages are added to the tree.

ArchLinux is already i686 and x86_64. Beside i say said you can compile easily in Arch with ABS. But these kind of things doesn't really affect the speed(at least not in a noticeble way). Finally it is all matter of taste and choice. Linux is a place of freedom. So everyone happy :) 
April 2, 2011 4:22:37 PM

I would go for the latest version of Ubuntu or even use the alfa version which is out there if you got real modern hardware, it all depends on how you intend to use the system and what is important for you!

What differs between the different distros. is the kernel which gets provided and not just the kernel version, but what comes inside it. It's the maintainer of the distribution which compiles the Linux kernel and decides what shall be in it and what shall not.

Debian is the best distribution I know when it comes to stability, but a lot of people have complained about old versions of software which comes with it, and the reason is because the latest version of software is not always the best + there is the option to use backports which enables you to use modern software just like any other distribution which is out there.

For Windows games: compile the latest version of Wine and learn how to do this. They have managed to do huge progress and they continue to do so, but it's a long way from perfection, and using Windows is the only option if you really want the best out of it.

To enjoy Linux, you should not treat is another Windows system, learn how it works and then enjoy what you get out of it. No problems with viruses or trojans and you don't need to waste your time rebooting and reinstalling the operating system if anything goes wrong, just make sure you can choose between different Linux kernels at startups and you save a lot of time by not needing to reinstall if something get's messed up.

So I would recommend Ubuntu because of all the support which is available, recent versions works quite good. Ubuntu 10.04 LTS if you want to be safe.
April 12, 2011 1:35:59 PM

Lots of good responses here, I do want to add that i've read 2 books,
Intro to Linux
Ubuntu Starter guide

Also took a course on Fedora Linux and Red Hat Enterprise through college, And i on occasion get to assist the AIX Admin here at work.

So while i got a bit to learn, i'm not new to linux.

So far Ubuntu is still in the running (mostly for the huge community!), Fedora, and i'm reading more on Sabayon.

Sabayon looks very interesting. I'm just curious how long they have been around? while many commands are interchangeable between flavors, it is not always true.

I really wish to keep 64bit use, and I feel my needs are more towards multimedia then gaming nowadays.

Any other comments on Sabayon? it has caught my interest, to be frank never heard of it before.

April 19, 2011 1:13:05 PM

Best answer selected by c911darkwolf.
April 19, 2011 1:13:52 PM

This thread can be closed, i'm testing out Fedora first as i am more familiar with it from my recent college course. I am also testing Sabayon. Ubuntu is pretty nice and i may give version 11 a run once it's live.
April 20, 2011 3:21:39 AM

This topic has been closed by Randomizer