1455
Windows 11 vs Linux supported HW
(lemmy.ml)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
1455 points (95.8% liked)
Linux
48008 readers
576 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Linux has better support for the long tail of hardware. Windows has better support for bleeding-edge hardware. The main reason for this is money.
Except for my AMD 1800x that was 4 years old when W11 launched and not supported.
I hate to break it to you but 4 years old is nowhere close to “bleeding edge” when it comes to PC hardware.
It's also not obsolete.
That’s kind of my point. Linux supports it, but Windows doesn’t anymore. Why? Money - OEMs aren’t selling them anymore, so why spend time to support new features on them? On the flip side, the heterogeneous chiplet structure of the 7950X3D was supported on Windows from day 1, while on Linux the scheduler is still unaware of the different perf characteristics to this day. Why? Same answer - money. AMD doesn’t make money selling 7950X3D on Linux, so they’re not going to spend time writing a kernel driver to optimize perf on it.
That may be true, but with the ridiculous increase in performance for this CPU due to the massive amount of L3 cache (X3D), I don't care. I just replaced a Linux compute node with an Intel Xeon Silver compute node with a custom built Linux node that features the 7950X3D, and I'm benchmarking now at over twice the speed (CFD-type work)! Not bad for a $650 consumer CPU. The difference between 128MB and 12MB of L3 cache is apparently pretty huge, from what I'm seeing. I think it's important to note that L3 cache can be shared across CPU cores.
The problem is that only half of the chiplets have access to the large cache. If the scheduler isn’t aware of that and a lot of data is shared across cores (as in the case for many games), you’ll miss out on most of that performance. AMD wrote a driver for Windows to help optimally schedule threads with high cache intensity to the expanded cache chiplets, but they didn’t do it for Linux. If your workload is not very chatty between cores, and threads don’t need to synchronize at 60Hz, it won’t matter as much. But for game workloads, it makes a big difference, and can actually result in worse performance than the homogenous chiplet design of the mid-tier 7800X3D if you get it wrong.