Instalează Steam
conectare
|
limbă
简体中文 (chineză simplificată)
繁體中文 (chineză tradițională)
日本語 (japoneză)
한국어 (coreeană)
ไทย (thailandeză)
български (bulgară)
Čeština (cehă)
Dansk (daneză)
Deutsch (germană)
English (engleză)
Español - España (spaniolă - Spania)
Español - Latinoamérica (spaniolă - America Latină)
Ελληνικά (greacă)
Français (franceză)
Italiano (italiană)
Bahasa Indonesia (indoneziană)
Magyar (maghiară)
Nederlands (neerlandeză)
Norsk (norvegiană)
Polski (poloneză)
Português (portugheză - Portugalia)
Português - Brasil (portugheză - Brazilia)
Русский (rusă)
Suomi (finlandeză)
Svenska (suedeză)
Türkçe (turcă)
Tiếng Việt (vietnameză)
Українська (ucraineană)
Raportează o problemă de traducere
If you look closely, the tests show much higher fps for Wayland when the fps of the benchmarks are already very high. It is because the Wayland compositor synchronizes to the screen refresh and won't do more than /refresh-rate/ copies per seconds.
So yes, fps are higher for high fps applications, and only the most recent frame, before the compositor draw the next frame for the screen, will be picked up and displayed.
However, for fps around or lower than 60 fps, X and the Wayland compositor would do about the same number of copies, and performance is similar.
People said than when XWayland would be entirely ready, its performance would be better than X, but it will be true only for non fullscreen applications. For fullscreen applications, we should get the same performance.
A big plus that can get XWayland is being tearing free (which it isn't now). It should be possible (without impacting performance), but is quite complicated.
i was looking at the ms and it look like to me Wayland will be way better for gaming
RealVNC, FreeRDP, are being worked on and, a few more. the network transparency in Xorg has been mostly dead any ways but yes there are a few on the way for Wayland