OP
LinuxUserSince2013
Member
I've been seeing lots of videos popping up about how bad Windows 11 is, and not just from Linux users, but also from long time Windows users.
The Issue Between Linux and Windows and How I currently Feel about Things.
- Thread starter LinuxUserSince2013
- Start date
I've been seeing lots of videos popping up about how bad Windows 11 is, and not just from Linux users, but also from long time Windows users.
If you'll allow this site to be used as a litmus test, we have had a very small increase in comments that mention switching to Linux because of Windows 11. A non-zero number of those people decided that Linux did not work for them and moved on. After which, they stopped posting here on this site. I would speculate that they returned to Windows, instead of going to MacOS or a BSD-based OS. Again, a non-zero number of those people did take the time to remark that they'd be returning to Windows.
Which is, well, what you'd expect. This seems to happen pretty much any time MSFT releases something new. You get a pile of people who complain, but they still continue to use the new MSFT offerings. Amusingly, when MSFT releases something even newer, they'll complain about that and declare that the previous OS was better. That either means MSFT products get worse, or that people just like to complain and don't like change.
Even back in the early days, there were people who didn't like Win98. There were all sorts of people who didn't like XP (often people were confused about activation and registration, of which you only needed to do the former). There were people who hated Vista, Windows 7, Windows 8, etc...
Each time this happens, we get a few people who try Linux and stick with it. We also get a bunch that try Linux and don't stick with it. Because we eschew things like telemetry, we don't have enough information for this, but I'd be interested in knowing how many people who tried Linux then stuck with it for a full year.
I've paid some attention to some other online support sites, and they seem to only have had a slight uptick. That jives with what I've seen here.
There are a variety of reasons why people don't stick with Linux, but I think the biggest reason would be that they're not interested in learning something new. They think they are, but they're not. Then, there are some infrequent cases where they truly can't seem to get Linux working with their specific hardware, regardless of how much help they've received.
Which is, well, what you'd expect. This seems to happen pretty much any time MSFT releases something new. You get a pile of people who complain, but they still continue to use the new MSFT offerings. Amusingly, when MSFT releases something even newer, they'll complain about that and declare that the previous OS was better. That either means MSFT products get worse, or that people just like to complain and don't like change.
Even back in the early days, there were people who didn't like Win98. There were all sorts of people who didn't like XP (often people were confused about activation and registration, of which you only needed to do the former). There were people who hated Vista, Windows 7, Windows 8, etc...
Each time this happens, we get a few people who try Linux and stick with it. We also get a bunch that try Linux and don't stick with it. Because we eschew things like telemetry, we don't have enough information for this, but I'd be interested in knowing how many people who tried Linux then stuck with it for a full year.
I've paid some attention to some other online support sites, and they seem to only have had a slight uptick. That jives with what I've seen here.
There are a variety of reasons why people don't stick with Linux, but I think the biggest reason would be that they're not interested in learning something new. They think they are, but they're not. Then, there are some infrequent cases where they truly can't seem to get Linux working with their specific hardware, regardless of how much help they've received.
I suspect that that final paragraph may be true. Those people have spent years, perhaps decades, running and learning Windows, and are then surprised and frustrated that they don't become expert at Linux within a few days. They expect every OS to work just like the one they're familiar with, and soon return to familiarity. Some of us enjoy learning new things, even things that are difficult and take time, and some of us don't.
theLegionWithin
Well-Known Member
that'd be a great sticker!
Exactly. Only an infinitesimal few will stick with Linux. And that's fine with me. I don't want Linux to get to be the world's main OS. If that happens, it'll just turn into another Windows (it's already starting to creep that way). Let the majority have Windows . . . and the few of us Linux.
Condobloke
Well-Known Member
"" The Issue Between Linux and Windows ""
There is no issue.
no issue = no problem
Linux forever !
There is no issue.
no issue = no problem
Linux forever !
Yeah, I too don't really care. I don't have even an iota of care that people use Windows. Heck, I don't even dislike MSFT. Also, my ego isn't so frail that I have to tie it to the software I use. I don't need other people to agree with me, join me, or act like me.
Also, I suppose that Linux is already the world's main OS. The only place it lags behind is on the desktop. Linux is used on all sorts of stuff, from phones to servers, from supercomputers to spacecraft, from cars to networking equipment, etc...
Linux is used all over the place, often by people who don't know they're using it. But there's only a fairly small percentage of desktop systems that are using Linux.
OP
LinuxUserSince2013
Member
Just yesterday I happened to come across this video. I wasn't looking for it, and never heard of the channel before either. The video describes my experience with Windows and Linux almost exactly.
Linux After One Year
Linux After One Year
I don't know about you all, but I got other things in life I like to get done too Sorry to bring it to you mate but thats exactly whats gonna change the comming years with goolag fakebook windows doubling down on your freedoms . Fakebook already owns your content and windows 11 scans your total drive unless you opt out for so called A.I learning. Aready gmail is reading all your emails etc etc . All this is whyi am now switching to linux because of the tremendous spying censoring and outright intimidating off ppl who speak their minds . Two years in prisson for a tweet in the UK is the new normal aparently . So before you go i got nothing to hide better think twice Operation stellar winds or earnest voice ring a bell ? https://rumble.com/v2b3zi0-nsa-william-binney-speaks-of-stellar-wind-spying-on-you.html
OP
LinuxUserSince2013
Member
I agree that all those places are a problem, but Linux doesn't protect our privacy from google, facebook, etc. I don't use facebook anymore, and I try to use a hosts file blocking script to hopefully get rid of the majority of facebook tracking. However I do still use google. I'm not sure what to do about the google issue. They are a lot harder to escape than Windows and Facebook, and X (twitter). I think it is terrible that people are being put in jail for posts they make on those social media platforms. I think a person should need to do something a whole lot worse than simply post something a little distasteful and boom they are being arrested. Stupid facebook banned me for no more than just trying to reach out and make some friends! * You are adding people too quickly. You are sending out too many messages. Oh dear we got to get rid of you! At first I thought I was going crazy, but then one day I did a little internet search and boom, I found a whole blog of people complaining about getting these messages and being banned for it. That is why I kinda feel like facebook hates lonely people. Or they are trying to gradually train people to only talk about what they want people to talk about on the platform.
False. Only missing things and i noticed over windows is nvidia control panel, shadowplay and dx12 performance. "graphics features" are there. DLSS, ray tracing, you name it.
Some missing functionality features from example nvcp or geforce experience can be done through environment variables, shadow play with OBS.
How is that false if they are missing and I quote.
"Only missing things and i noticed over windows is nvidia control panel, shadowplay and dx12 performance."
Seems to me missing dx12 is bad enough along with nvidia control panel, and shadowplay.
kibasnowpaw
Well-Known Member
I’ll give my two cents as someone who’s been on Windows since the MS-DOS days.
On r/ubuntu you see tons of “I’m leaving Windows” posts, but honestly, I don’t think security is the main reason for most people. I’d bet a lot of them couldn’t explain a single concrete Windows 11 security problem beyond whatever headlines and hype they’ve seen. The real driver is simpler: Windows 11 has built up a reputation for being intrusive, bloated, and increasingly hostile to the user.
For me it’s not that I sit around thinking “Windows 11 is insecure.” I’m just tired of Windows. Every major release feels like more bloat, more “features” you didn’t ask for, more nudges, more friction, more stuff running in the background. I was already mentally done after Windows 7. And I still think Windows XP was the best Windows Microsoft ever made, not because it was perfect, but because it felt like it belonged to you. You could do what you wanted with it. It didn’t constantly feel like it was trying to steer you.
What really pushed people over the edge wasn’t some technical security argument. It was the forced migration. Windows 10 is being pushed toward end-of-life, and Microsoft clearly wants people on Windows 11 whether their hardware is ready or not. If Windows 10 support had just kept going in a normal way, I genuinely think fewer people would have moved. The shift would still have happened over time, sure, but the “you will upgrade and you will like it” energy is what’s accelerating it.
And the biggest issue for me is freedom and control. After XP, Windows got more and more locked down. More activation, more tying the license to hardware, more “you can use this, but only on our terms.” And Windows 11 is basically the peak of that mindset: TPM requirements, secure boot expectations, and an OS that feels like it doesn’t trust the person sitting in front of it. That’s not automatically “bad security,” but it is a statement about ownership. At some point you start asking: do I own this machine, or am I renting someone else’s operating system?
A perfect example is the local account situation. People find a way to install with a local account, then it gets patched, then a new workaround appears, then that gets patched too. The direction is obvious: Microsoft wants you tied to an online account, and that comes with identity linkage and data collection. You can call it convenience, you can call it ecosystem, but it’s also control and telemetry. That’s the part that makes me angry, because it’s not about making my computer better, it’s about making me easier to manage.
So yeah, you can argue Windows 11 can be hardened. You can argue Linux isn’t magically secure. That’s fine. But the reason I moved isn’t “Windows 11 security is terrible.” It’s that Windows 11 feels like a locked-down, constantly monetized platform that’s being pushed onto users, and I’m done being treated like a product.
On r/ubuntu you see tons of “I’m leaving Windows” posts, but honestly, I don’t think security is the main reason for most people. I’d bet a lot of them couldn’t explain a single concrete Windows 11 security problem beyond whatever headlines and hype they’ve seen. The real driver is simpler: Windows 11 has built up a reputation for being intrusive, bloated, and increasingly hostile to the user.
For me it’s not that I sit around thinking “Windows 11 is insecure.” I’m just tired of Windows. Every major release feels like more bloat, more “features” you didn’t ask for, more nudges, more friction, more stuff running in the background. I was already mentally done after Windows 7. And I still think Windows XP was the best Windows Microsoft ever made, not because it was perfect, but because it felt like it belonged to you. You could do what you wanted with it. It didn’t constantly feel like it was trying to steer you.
What really pushed people over the edge wasn’t some technical security argument. It was the forced migration. Windows 10 is being pushed toward end-of-life, and Microsoft clearly wants people on Windows 11 whether their hardware is ready or not. If Windows 10 support had just kept going in a normal way, I genuinely think fewer people would have moved. The shift would still have happened over time, sure, but the “you will upgrade and you will like it” energy is what’s accelerating it.
And the biggest issue for me is freedom and control. After XP, Windows got more and more locked down. More activation, more tying the license to hardware, more “you can use this, but only on our terms.” And Windows 11 is basically the peak of that mindset: TPM requirements, secure boot expectations, and an OS that feels like it doesn’t trust the person sitting in front of it. That’s not automatically “bad security,” but it is a statement about ownership. At some point you start asking: do I own this machine, or am I renting someone else’s operating system?
A perfect example is the local account situation. People find a way to install with a local account, then it gets patched, then a new workaround appears, then that gets patched too. The direction is obvious: Microsoft wants you tied to an online account, and that comes with identity linkage and data collection. You can call it convenience, you can call it ecosystem, but it’s also control and telemetry. That’s the part that makes me angry, because it’s not about making my computer better, it’s about making me easier to manage.
So yeah, you can argue Windows 11 can be hardened. You can argue Linux isn’t magically secure. That’s fine. But the reason I moved isn’t “Windows 11 security is terrible.” It’s that Windows 11 feels like a locked-down, constantly monetized platform that’s being pushed onto users, and I’m done being treated like a product.
@The Duck :-
From what I understand, with most distros - where you install the drivers from their repos - the 'Nvidia Control Panel' is offered as a separate option. In other words, the user has to make the conscious decision as to whether they want to have the Control Panel or not.
For us in Puppyland, apart from the newest Debian-based Puppies - which now use 'apt-get', Synaptic & all the rest of it - older Puppies mostly tend to install via the official .run files. When these are run through our Puppy-native Nvidia installer GUI, the Control Panel is automatically installed as part of the compile / build process.
You'll still end up with the same components.....but you obtain them in a slightly different way.
As for the other items (DX12? 'ShadowPlay'?).....no idea! Don't ask me, 'cos I'm no 'gamer'.....and what little bit of gaming I DO occasionally indulge in is all Linux-native 'indie' stuff anyway.
(shrug...)
Mike.
Mm.....that's kinda subjective.
From what I understand, with most distros - where you install the drivers from their repos - the 'Nvidia Control Panel' is offered as a separate option. In other words, the user has to make the conscious decision as to whether they want to have the Control Panel or not.
For us in Puppyland, apart from the newest Debian-based Puppies - which now use 'apt-get', Synaptic & all the rest of it - older Puppies mostly tend to install via the official .run files. When these are run through our Puppy-native Nvidia installer GUI, the Control Panel is automatically installed as part of the compile / build process.
You'll still end up with the same components.....but you obtain them in a slightly different way.
As for the other items (DX12? 'ShadowPlay'?).....no idea! Don't ask me, 'cos I'm no 'gamer'.....and what little bit of gaming I DO occasionally indulge in is all Linux-native 'indie' stuff anyway.
(shrug...)
Mike.
Last edited:
kibasnowpaw
Well-Known Member
@The Duck :-
Mm.....that's kinda subjective.
From what I understand, with most distros - where you install the drivers from their repos - the 'Nvidia Control Panel' is offered as a separate option. In other words, the user has to make the conscious decision as to whether they want to have the Control Panel or not.
For us in Puppyland, apart from the newest Debian-based Puppies - which now use 'apt-get', Synaptic & all the rest of it - older Puppies mostly tend to install via the official .run files. When these are run through our Puppy-native Nvidia installer GUI, the Control Panel is automatically installed as part of the compile / build process.
You'll still end up with the same components.....but you obtain them in a slightly different way.
As for the other items (DX12? 'ShadowPlay'?).....no idea! Don't ask me, 'cos I'm no 'gamer', and what little bit of gaming I DO occasionally indulge in is all Linux-native 'indie' stuff anyway.
(shrug...)
Mike.
I think I need to step in here, because a lot is getting mixed together and people are arguing past each other. Some of what’s being said is fact, some is opinion, and some is just the wrong label for the right idea.
First, “Windows will always be around” is basically a statement about inertia, not technology. Windows has decades of ecosystem gravity: hardware vendors, commercial software, workplaces, and gaming studios target it first. That doesn’t mean Linux can’t do the job. It means the default path for the average user is still Windows because that’s what most vendors support without questions.
Second, “Windows will always rule for hardcore gaming because of graphics card drivers” is partly true, but it’s not as absolute as it used to be. The real reason Windows is still the easiest path for “hardcore gaming” is not only drivers, it’s the whole stack: anti-cheat support, launchers, day-one compatibility expectations, and the fact that games are built and tested primarily on Windows. Linux gaming has improved massively, but the edge cases are still real.
Third, the word “features” is where this thread derails. There are two different meanings:
- GPU and rendering features (Vulkan support, ray tracing in supported titles, upscaling tech depending on the game and engine).
- Vendor ecosystem features (NVIDIA Control Panel/GeForce Experience, ShadowPlay-style capture, and “it’s all in one place” tuning tools).
On NVIDIA specifically: Linux does have NVIDIA’s proprietary drivers, and the core driver capability is there for a lot of modern gaming. But Windows-only software like GeForce Experience and ShadowPlay is not there in the same native form. You replace those with other tools (OBS for capture, MangoHud/Gamemode, compositor and environment-variable tweaks, etc.). That’s not identical, but it’s functional. Also, “NVIDIA Control Panel” on Linux is basically “nvidia-settings” (and how it’s packaged/installed varies by distro). So saying “there is no control panel” is often just a packaging/workflow difference, not literally “impossible.”
DX12 is another point that needs precision. Linux does not run DirectX 12 natively. What happens in practice is translation: DX12 games can run through Proton using VKD3D-Proton (DX12-to-Vulkan). Sometimes the performance is excellent, sometimes it’s worse, and sometimes a game just doesn’t behave. So “DX12 is missing” is not accurate, but “DX12 is translated and results vary by title” is accurate.
AMD Catalyst/Control Center is also an outdated reference. On Linux you generally don’t use “Catalyst Control Center.” AMD’s mainstream driver stack on Linux is largely built into the kernel and Mesa (amdgpu + Mesa). The tuning and UI experience is different than Windows’ Radeon Software, and that’s a fair criticism if someone wants a single polished vendor app. But it’s not the same as “AMD doesn’t work on Linux.”
X-Plane is a good example of why sweeping statements don’t help. X-Plane can run on Linux, and it uses modern graphics APIs, but stability depends on your exact GPU, driver stack, Vulkan/OpenGL path, and distro. If it crashes for one person, that’s a real problem, but it’s not proof the entire platform is broken.
So the “truth” here is basically:
Windows is still the smoothest default for maximum compatibility and minimum effort, especially for certain multiplayer/anti-cheat scenarios and vendor tooling.
Linux has caught up a lot for gaming, and the GPU-level capabilities are not the limiting factor people think they are, but the ecosystem and tooling are different.
When someone says “missing features,” they should specify whether they mean rendering capability or vendor convenience software, because those are very different claims.
That’s my view as someone who’s used Windows since the older days and still uses Linux daily: the debate isn’t “Linux good / Windows bad.” It’s tradeoffs, definitions, and how much friction you’re willing to tolerate for control and freedom.
You can check my live stream if you want to see how games run on Linux the way i do it.
Kiba Snowpaw
Epic! As a 39+ year old Ice Wolf, I've been gaming since the 80s, truly living as a legend. ❄️ My hardcore furry style adds an extra layer of intensity! It's like igniting a star when I blaze through games. From 8-bit to 4K, my journey is a testament to the evolution of gaming! I've left my claw...
www.youtube.com
@kibasnowpaw :-
And there's one primary reason behind that "smoothness", in all honesty. Across the entire Windows ecosystem, at any given time - for any given release, that is - everybody is running the exact same kernel, and the exact same set of officially-approved, system-level .dll dependencies. And of course, this makes life SO much easier for Windows developers....
Linux HAS come on a long way where gaming is concerned.....in large part thanks to Valve, with Proton, etc. And thanks also have to go to the WINE dev team, whose efforts underpin everything else; after years of very half-hearted development, they seem to have got an infusion of "new blood".....as a result of which, WINE development itself has gone "stratospheric" in a very short space of time.
I still prefer my Linux-native indie games, though! Sorry an' all that; AAA+ titles just leave me "cold".....
They don't DO anything for me.
(shrug...)
Mike.
Open Gaming Collective (OGC) formed to push Linux gaming even further
An exciting new announcement is the formation of the Open Gaming Collective, a collaborative organisation between many names in the Linux sphere.
www.gamingonlinux.com
kibasnowpaw
Well-Known Member
@kibasnowpaw :-
And there's one primary reason behind that "smoothness", in all honesty. Across the entire Windows ecosystem, at any given time - for any given release, that is - everybody is running the exact same kernel, and the exact same set of officially-approved, system-level .dll dependencies. And of course, this makes life SO much easier for Windows developers....
Linux HAS come on a long way where gaming is concerned.....in large part thanks to Valve, with Proton, etc. And thanks also have to go to the WINE dev team, whose efforts underpin everything else; after years of very half-hearted development, they seem to have got an infusion of "new blood".....as a result of which, WINE development itself has gone "stratospheric" in a very short space of time.
I still prefer my Linux-native indie games, though! Sorry an' all that; AAA+ titles just leave me "cold".....
They don't DO anything for me.
(shrug...)
Mike.
You’re not wrong about the “smoothness” factor, Mike. On Windows you’ve got one vendor-defined kernel line and a broadly consistent set of system-level components that developers can assume will be there, in a predictable way, across huge numbers of machines. That standardization lowers friction for studios and middleware, and it’s a big reason Windows ends up being the default target for “it should just work.”
On Linux you’ve got the opposite reality: multiple kernels in the wild, multiple userlands, different packaging choices, different library versions, different compositor stacks, etc. It’s not that Linux “can’t” do it, it’s that the platform surface is more varied, so the burden shifts toward Valve/WINE/Proton to normalize the experience on top. And you’re also right to give WINE credit: Proton exists because WINE exists, and the pace of progress over the last years has been very noticeable.
Where I differ a bit is the “best way to play” part. I still tend to run games in plain WINE when I can, because I like the control and the transparency. I can isolate prefixes, control DLL overrides, keep a clean environment, and troubleshoot in a way that feels more “mine.” Proton is obviously excellent, and in some cases it’s simply the better tool because it ships a curated stack (DXVK/VKD3D-Proton patches, game-specific fixes, sensible defaults). There are games where I’ve hit limitations in WINE that I couldn’t realistically brute-force away, but Proton on Steam just works. Two examples for me were GreedFall and Horizon Zero Dawn, where Proton handled rendering/compatibility issues I couldn’t fully solve in a normal WINE setup despite trying the usual workarounds.
And yeah, I’m with you on AAA fatigue. I’ve been cold on a lot of big-budget releases for years. I’m much more “indie-first,” but with a caveat: indie doesn’t automatically mean good. There’s a flood of low-effort shovelware and asset flips now, so I’m picky. I’ve backed a lot of projects (30+ on Kickstarter), including Angels with Scaly Wings, and you can literally see my name in the supporters credits (Kiba Snowpaw) in the bottom-right of that screenshot. That’s the stuff I like supporting: smaller teams with personality and ideas, not just budget and marketing.
I’ve also been gaming basically my whole life. Late 80s / early 90s was my start sitting on my dad’s lap playing on his machine with him and his friend so this isn’t a “new trend” thing for me. It’s more that Linux finally reached a point where I can live there full-time, and between native titles, WINE, and Proton, I can play what I actually care about without feeling like I’m constantly fighting the platform.
I think I need to step in here, because a lot is getting mixed together and people are arguing past each other. Some of what’s being said is fact, some is opinion, and some is just the wrong label for the right idea.
First, “Windows will always be around” is basically a statement about inertia, not technology. Windows has decades of ecosystem gravity: hardware vendors, commercial software, workplaces, and gaming studios target it first. That doesn’t mean Linux can’t do the job. It means the default path for the average user is still Windows because that’s what most vendors support without questions.
Second, “Windows will always rule for hardcore gaming because of graphics card drivers” is partly true, but it’s not as absolute as it used to be. The real reason Windows is still the easiest path for “hardcore gaming” is not only drivers, it’s the whole stack: anti-cheat support, launchers, day-one compatibility expectations, and the fact that games are built and tested primarily on Windows. Linux gaming has improved massively, but the edge cases are still real.
Third, the word “features” is where this thread derails. There are two different meanings:
Those are not the same thing. If someone says “Linux is missing features,” they need to say which category they mean.
- GPU and rendering features (Vulkan support, ray tracing in supported titles, upscaling tech depending on the game and engine).
- Vendor ecosystem features (NVIDIA Control Panel/GeForce Experience, ShadowPlay-style capture, and “it’s all in one place” tuning tools).
On NVIDIA specifically: Linux does have NVIDIA’s proprietary drivers, and the core driver capability is there for a lot of modern gaming. But Windows-only software like GeForce Experience and ShadowPlay is not there in the same native form. You replace those with other tools (OBS for capture, MangoHud/Gamemode, compositor and environment-variable tweaks, etc.). That’s not identical, but it’s functional. Also, “NVIDIA Control Panel” on Linux is basically “nvidia-settings” (and how it’s packaged/installed varies by distro). So saying “there is no control panel” is often just a packaging/workflow difference, not literally “impossible.”
DX12 is another point that needs precision. Linux does not run DirectX 12 natively. What happens in practice is translation: DX12 games can run through Proton using VKD3D-Proton (DX12-to-Vulkan). Sometimes the performance is excellent, sometimes it’s worse, and sometimes a game just doesn’t behave. So “DX12 is missing” is not accurate, but “DX12 is translated and results vary by title” is accurate.
AMD Catalyst/Control Center is also an outdated reference. On Linux you generally don’t use “Catalyst Control Center.” AMD’s mainstream driver stack on Linux is largely built into the kernel and Mesa (amdgpu + Mesa). The tuning and UI experience is different than Windows’ Radeon Software, and that’s a fair criticism if someone wants a single polished vendor app. But it’s not the same as “AMD doesn’t work on Linux.”
X-Plane is a good example of why sweeping statements don’t help. X-Plane can run on Linux, and it uses modern graphics APIs, but stability depends on your exact GPU, driver stack, Vulkan/OpenGL path, and distro. If it crashes for one person, that’s a real problem, but it’s not proof the entire platform is broken.
So the “truth” here is basically:
Windows is still the smoothest default for maximum compatibility and minimum effort, especially for certain multiplayer/anti-cheat scenarios and vendor tooling.
Linux has caught up a lot for gaming, and the GPU-level capabilities are not the limiting factor people think they are, but the ecosystem and tooling are different.
When someone says “missing features,” they should specify whether they mean rendering capability or vendor convenience software, because those are very different claims.
That’s my view as someone who’s used Windows since the older days and still uses Linux daily: the debate isn’t “Linux good / Windows bad.” It’s tradeoffs, definitions, and how much friction you’re willing to tolerate for control and freedom.
You can check my live stream if you want to see how games run on Linux the way i do it.
Kiba Snowpaw
Epic! As a 39+ year old Ice Wolf, I've been gaming since the 80s, truly living as a legend. ❄️ My hardcore furry style adds an extra layer of intensity! It's like igniting a star when I blaze through games. From 8-bit to 4K, my journey is a testament to the evolution of gaming! I've left my claw...
Very well said.
I have no interest in going back and forward telling each other who is right or wrong. I replied to what you said "graphical features", i additionally added those convenience tools and the missing dx12 performance, specifically with nvidia cards which is being fixed likely this year. Missing dx12 performance not missing dx12 functionality.
If of interest the performance loss can be up to 30% in some games.
Similar threads
