Am 11.07.25 um 09:43 schrieb Jan Drögehoff:
These kind of benchmarks are worthless and cannot be reliably reproduced by anyone. The author has stated that they are going to share more tests using Kubuntu and Fedora however I don't think they are going to start properly testing. Would be nice to see a graph showing how X11 and Wayland behave both idle and under load over a larger time span (say, 24 hours), might be worth trying to do these tests myself.
an accurate test needs way more that just a bunch of powertop outputs, but it shows a trend.
I (can) confirm this trend with an experiment i did with "Eve Online" running under X11 and Wayland. The X11 session topped the Wayland session by round about 30 FPS running the game in unthrottled mode in the same empty part of space to get the maximum fps possible. So there is a performance difference and thats one reason why i still use X11 on my gaming desktop.
And it's not a big surprise that it is "slower" as it adds security checks and different other constructs, that are not present in X11.
The big questions are: can it still be optimized and is it hurting the user experience significantly?
From running Wayland on my tablet for ~ 10months now, I can answer the second part:
no, it does not, except it's more user effort needed to capture a screen. Those few extra mW do not count, compared to watching Netflix or turning on the display itself ;)
best regards, Marius Schwarz -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
