- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Linux vs Windows tested in 10 games - Linux 17% faster on Average::Computers, hardware, software and gaming in Spanish and English
Linux vs Windows tested in 10 games - Linux 17% faster on Average::Computers, hardware, software and gaming in Spanish and English
Windows has so much garbage overhead via telemetry, etc. Glad to see someone quantifying how detrimental it is.
AVs on windows also do impact disk latency a lot.
Not to also mention the outdated filesytem
We should rename NTFS to OTFS now.
For real - it would be AWESOME if you could install windows on ZFS or btrfs or whatever
You’d still be running Windows though so why bother
While I agree that Linux is generally better, there are some use cases outside of gaming that work better in (or are required to use for one reason or another) Windows.
Oh I definitely agree. But still; when I’m running Windows the filesystem is very low on my list of annoyances.
https://github.com/maharmstone/btrfs
That has a hell of a lot of disclaimers around reliability, and I’m not seeing anything about it being able to actually host the operating system on the filesystem itself, or any way to roll this into the installer itself
They knew it’s not going to stay new forever, but they went ahead with that name anyway. I guess that’s what happens when the marketing team wins the company raffle.
NTFS isn’t the issue, at least in my experience, and not even Microsoft’s implementation of it (though ntfs-3g seems faster). The issue is the File Explorer: Things like reading mtimes of gigantic directories takes maybe a second under linux, nushell under windows (native, not WSL) is just a tiny bit slower, while File Explorer takes minutes to sort by mtime. Coming to think of it I should try Dolphin.
Generally speaking the problem with Windows is not so much NT but everything on top of it.
Windows telemetry CPU usage is almost nothing. This is mostly proton/dxvk doing it’s magic.