Ampere Opens the Door for 192-Core Linux Gaming Machines

Render
(Image credit: Ampere Computing)


If you ever wondered whether it would be possible to game on one of Ampere's "Altra Max" 192-core CPUs, you'll be glad to know the company has just released a "Gaming under Linux" guide. It aims to empower users in setting up Steam AArch64 platforms for Linux - alongside Steam Play (Proton) itself - within the open-source OS, with Ampere's 192 cores serving as the proverbial cart pushers.

This is not just any old PDF guide, either. Instead, Ampere is maintaining a GitHub repository meant to ease users into configuring a system based on the company's Ampere Altra, Altra Max, and Ampere One CPUs. It should also be applicable to other (generally less-powerful) 64-bit Arm platforms offered by Ampere's competitors. 

Of course, Ampere only sells CPUs - there's still the need for a GPU in there somewhere taking over for graphics calculations. Ampere's documentation, for instance, uses a server-geared NVIDIA RTX A6000 to pull GPU duty. If you're curious about what that means in terms of pure graphics performance however, you might be in for a disappointment: the $6,800, 48 GB VRAM-toting A6000 delivers around 5-26% less performance than Nvidia's GeForce flagship, the RTX 4090, across both gaming (expected) and professional workloads (much more unexpected).

Remember that "Windows gaming on Linux" has been mostly conquered through Proton, leading to playable performance for most games released (and available) on the Steam Deck. That this can happen even while running an emulation layer is already a showcase of how powerful mobile chips have become. But with 192 cores available to process both the gaming's computing requirements and the additional overhead from the translation layer, it's hard to see how Ampere's idea falls flat --that's likely enough horsepower to push through any leftover "muck" in the emulation code (which in the case of Ampere's installation, is taken care of through the use of Box86 and Box64).

It's interesting that Ampere went to the trouble of creating such a package and tutorial guide: We'd expect the company's server CPUs to currently be staying far, far away from any gaming workloads. Of course, programmers and Large Language Model (LLM) wizards have a right to game, too. And perhaps there's demand for an Ampere-based gaming solution on the more mundane, tedious days. Or perhaps this is just a case of a company pointing out that gaming is possible on its products, in the hopes of raising its profile. Either way, it's nice to know that PC gaming is possible without Windows or native x86.

Francisco Pires
Freelance News Writer

Francisco Pires is a freelance news writer for Tom's Hardware with a soft side for quantum computing.

  • bit_user
    Ampere Opens the Door for 192-Core Linux Gaming Machines
    Do you mean 384-cores, by using dual 192-core CPUs? Because AMD's Genoa already scales to 192 cores / 384 threads, in a dual-CPU system.

    The problem with using server CPUs in gaming machines is that they don't clock as high as desktop CPUs. Workstation CPUs tend to clock a little higher, but you probably can't do better than a modern desktop CPU, for most games.

    Even if you'd use the CPU to do software rendering, the popular and more feature-packed software renderers (e.g. LavaPipe) don't scale well to so many cores.

    We'd expect the company's server CPUs to currently be staying far, far away from any gaming workloads.
    I think the main reason they might be doing this is probably for automated CI (Continuous Integration) testing, that some of their customers want to do.
    Reply
  • RichardtST
    Linux gaming... Proton... Oh God.... Please... Stop! You're killing me!
    ROTFLMAO...
    :)
    Reply
  • JamesJones44
    RichardtST said:
    Linux gaming... Proton... Oh God.... Please... Stop! You're killing me!
    ROTFLMAO...
    :)
    I would support anything that moves gaming away from Windows, though this likely isn't it.
    Reply
  • JamesJones44
    I know we are talking about the emulation/translation layer largely, but unless a game gets optimized to pre-compute those translations I still think you will be at the mercy of under utilizing the processor by a large margin and not really boosting performance all that much. Especially since a lot of games still operate under a single game loop concept (especially FPSs).

    All that being said, I would be happy for someone to build a test system to tell me I'm wrong :D
    Reply
  • MobileJAD
    Nobody is going to ask how much that 192 core ARM server cpu costs and who would actually game on it?
    I'm all for gaming on a ARM or RISC processor either under native code or x86 emulation, but to suggest people would actually game on a expensive server grade cpu?
    Reply
  • evdjj3j
    I don't believe Proton is considered an emulator.

    https://emulation.gametechwiki.com/index.php/Compatibility_layers
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton_(software)
    Reply
  • mitch074
    evdjj3j said:
    I don't believe Proton is considered an emulator.

    https://emulation.gametechwiki.com/index.php/Compatibility_layers
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton_(software)
    Proton is a fork of Wine. Wine is originally a recursive acronym : Wine Is Not an Emulator.
    So what is Wine (and by the same token, what is Proton) ? I'll cite the project's website (https://www.winehq.org) :
    Wine is a compatibility layer capable of running Windows applications on several POSIX-compliant operating systems, such as Linux, macOS, & BSD. Instead of simulating internal Windows logic like a virtual machine or emulator, Wine translates Windows API calls into POSIX calls on-the-fly, eliminating the performance and memory penalties of other methods and allowing you to cleanly integrate Windows applications into your desktop.
    In short, provided it can get a 1-to-1 translation of NT calls to POSIX calls, it can work as fast as Windows. And, where the NT kernel is slower than Linux, an application running on Wine can run faster than native.
    Reply
  • NeoMorpheus
    RichardtST said:
    Linux gaming... Proton... Oh God.... Please... Stop! You're killing me!
    ROTFLMAO...
    :)
    I ditched windows in my gaming PC for ChimeraOs and it has been the best move ever.
    Reply
  • russell_john
    A lot of good this will do when most game developers can't even make 8 cores thread correctly .....
    Reply
  • bit_user
    mitch074 said:
    In short, provided it can get a 1-to-1 translation of NT calls to POSIX calls, it can work as fast as Windows. And, where the NT kernel is slower than Linux, an application running on Wine can run faster than native.
    A lot of WinAPI calls don't have a 1:1 POSIX equivalent. For instance, the whole way that Windows' IO Completion Ports work is different than how you do efficient I/O multiplexing, on Linux. And, until very recently, Linux had no equivalent of WaitForMultipleObjects(). And I mean Linux, not POSIX, which still has no equivalent!

    Then, you have parts of Windows like Direct3D, which requires a huge amount of machinery to run atop OpenGL or Vulkan, on Linux.

    But, even far more basic parts of Windows, like the loader, have to be emulated on Linux. That's right, I used the "E" word, because Linux has a loader, executable and library formats, an ABI, calling conventions, etc. And they're all different than Windows. Even the filesystem hierarchy is different, and WINE handles that, too.

    What WINE should really say, instead of this nonsense about mapping Win API calls to POSIX calls, is that it uses a native implementation of the WinAPI and the Windows runtime environment.
    Reply