Shadow of Mordor: Performance Tests

As mentioned in the previous post, Shadow of Mordor finally made it to Linux thanks to Feral. Since that game includes a proper benchmark tool, we can actually compare how well this port runs versus the Windows version. Sadly, there is still a wide gap in performance as we will see below.

The first video below tested its performance on GTX 680, a three years old card from nVidia, but one of the higher end cards of the 600 series. The configuration was as follows:

  • CPU: Intel i7-4770 at 3.4Ghz
  • GPU: NVIDIA GTX 680 2GB
  • RAM: 8GB DDR3 Corsair 1333MHz
  • OS: Ubuntu 15.04 64Bit/Windows 10 Pro 64Bit (Dual Boot)

The result leaves nothing to speculation:

  • Max FPS: 81.40 on Windows vs 50.87 on Ubuntu [ 62% of the Windows Performance ]
  • Average FPS: 55.83 on Windows vs 30.16 on Ubuntu [ 54% of the Windows Performance ]
  • Lowest FPS: 31.65 on Windows vs 6.84 on Ubuntu [ 22 % of the Windows Performance ]
  • Amplitude (Max vs Min FPS) : 49.75 on Windows vs 44.03 on Ubuntu

As you can see the game runs about half as fast as the Windows version on average. Even though we are lucky to have this port, frankly it’s hard to find such gap acceptable. If we could get within 10-20% of the Windows version framerate it would not be such an issue, but half as much makes it very hard to recommend Linux for gaming at all in this particular case.

On the same day another Linux user shared a benchmark on newer GPU card. the GTX980 – which is tbe best nVidia card available currently (if you exclude the newer Titan).

  • CPU: Intel I7 4790k at 4Ghz
  • GPU: Nvidia GTX980 4Gb
  • Nvidia drivers: 352.30 on Linux and 353.62 on Windows
  • RAM: 8Gb
  • OS: Ubuntu 15.04 64 Bit / Windows 8.1

As you can see the key difference here vs the previous configuration is the GPU card. The CPU is very much in the same class while clocked higher in this case.

This time the gap is not as bad as for the previous case:

  • Max FPS: 152.18 on Windows vs 114.33 on Ubuntu [ 75% of the Windows Performance ]
  • Average FPS: 107.99 on Windows vs 73.57 on Ubuntu [ 68% of the Windows Performance ]
  • Min FPS: 75.36 on Windows vs 39.14 on Ubuntu [ 52 % of the Windows Performance ]
  • Amplitude (Max – Min) : 76.82 on Windows vs 75.19 on Ubuntu.

It seems like a newer card is doing slightly better on Linux vs a less recent one. This is particularly showing if you compare the improvement facts between the two benchmarks:

  • On average the GTX980 gets 193% more frames per second on Windows vs the GTX680, while on Linux the increase is at 243 %.

But still, less than 70% of the Windows performance on average is hardly stellar. It would not matter that much if the Linux figures were anyway above 60 FPS, but it’s not the case: while we lack the information regarding the distribution of its performance, there’s a good likelihood that 30% of the time you will get less than 60 fps on Linux in-game. And that’s on really, really expensive hardware.

Now, this is native port, so one could expect higher performance than when you do a port with a wrapper like eON right ? Well… we actually have a comparison available, once again from the same Ubuntu User, on Bioshock Infinite with a GTX 680. Check it out:

There is no precise summary just like in Shadow of Mordor, but you can see that at Max settings the framerate on Ubuntu is about 50% of the Windows rate. So is a native port better ? Yeah, probably A LITTLE BIT. But we have been waiting for a while and if it takes that much effort just to squeeze a couple more percents for a native port vs a wrapper job, I’m wondering if that’s really the right way to go, since Feral and Aspyr are going to be constrained in terms of resources (they can’t handle probably more than a dozen titles a year each).

It will be interesting to see how well Shadow of Mordor will run on WINE when DX11 is implemented around the end of the year.

More importantly, apart from an ultra-specific case where Valve managed to get more FPS on L4D2 on the Linux version vs Windows (now one has to wonder if it was more of PR stunt than anything else), there is still no demonstrated way to get nearly as much performance on Linux vs Windows. The previous ports from Aspyr showed the same issue as well.

While the Linux games catalogue continues to grow, it will be hard for anyone to recommend the Steam Machines as console or Windows PC replacements if games perform so badly. Vulkan may improve things in the future, but until then, whether it’s native or wrapped, we seem to be condemned to get way less juice out of our hardware on Linux.


BoilingSteam lets you access our content for free, but writing articles is a constant investment. We don't use ads or sponsporship, help us make our activities sustainable by donating via LiberaPay. You can follow what we do via our newsletter, our RSS feed, our Mastodon profile or our Twitter feed. We also have Peertube and Youtube channels. If you'd like to chat, you can also find us on #boilingsteam:matrix.org.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
12 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Batman

Thanks for the well done benchmark tests. This is really, really depressing to read, I would’ve expected newly native games to perform on par with Windows. Especially running on new high-end graphic cards. Do you know what the main cause of the low performance is? Is it the drivers, optimization of the game, OpenGL vs. DirectX, etc?

kwahoo

50-60% of Direct3D version framerate is true for most (if not all) modern ports. If OpenGL shader performance is 50% lower than DX one, then nothing can help you except adding stronger GPU. That’s why gap is lower with GTX 980.

Wrapper or not, in-house or external porter, multi-threading, all these things are not important when GPU shader performance (a problem known since S4L release) is a clear bottleneck.

kwahoo

http://steamcommunity.com/app/41070/discussions/0/828927580787451324/?l=polish#c846942156137491894
“There’s this strange situation with OpenGL drivers ATM, especially on Linux. Strictly speaking, latest NVidia driver itself is slightly faster in OpenGL/Linux, than in Windows/D3D. However, seems that shader performance when running with it is much lower. This is the 50% speed difference people are talking about. Shader performance is largely a factor of shader compiler embedded in the driver. NVidia is working on this, and if they make it as fast as on d3d, cards like yours will probably benefit the most, due to the aforementioned bandwidth issue. “

stqn

The CPU is also an important factor in framerate differences since OpenGL is single-threaded and games tend to use one core to 100% (I haven’t checked if it is the case for Mordor).

In this case of course the faster CPU in the second benchmark cannot explain the boost from 30 to 70 FPS :).

Logic Al

Yeh, I have no faith in seeing equal or close performances to Windows with most ports. In the long run, it will take developers targeting Vulkan to see big name next gen games on Linux.

[…] of Heroes 2 was also released by Feral during August. It’s a solid port but just like for Shadow of Mordor, the port performance is not very impressive compared to the Windows version – in max […]

[…] before even native ports fail to show great performance – one can see the recent example of Shadow of Mordor to remain a little bit doubtful about the “native is always better than non-native” […]

[…] the performance of the Linux port is abysmal (versus the Windows version, as shown in numerous benchmarks), if you have the hardware to get it running at proper details you will probably end up loving this […]

[…] on Windows and I am not sure it has even sold very well. Yet it is probably a game at the level of Shadow of Mordor for that matter, or better still. Shadow of Mordor was fun but the Tolkien references made the […]