Linux Gaming

25654 readers

252 users here now

Discussions and news about gaming on the GNU/Linux family of operating systems (including the Steam Deck). Potentially a $HOME away from home for disgruntled /r/linux_gaming denizens of the redditarian demesne.

This page can be subscribed to via RSS.

Original /r/linux_gaming pengwing by uoou.

No memes/shitposts/low-effort posts, please.

Resources

Help:

Launchers/Game Library Managers:

General:

Discord:

IRC:

Gaming on Linux

Matrix:

Telegram:

Gaming on Linux

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

monolalia@lemmy.world

[Solved] Terrible performance in Linux Mint compared to Windows (piefed.ca)

submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by PlzGibHugs@piefed.ca to c/linux_gaming@lemmy.world

24 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I have an older computer that I use for some simple games. Its I5-7400, GTX-1050, 12GB memory, and an SSD - not new by any standards, but most of the games I'm playing are a decade old or more. I switched to Linux Mint today, since I don't want to use Windows 11, but the performance on Mint is terrible compared to Windows 10. For example, in Portal 2's native Linux version, I get like 10 fps in the title screen. War Thunder doesn't even launch. The drivers are set to Nvidia's proprietary drivers via the GUI. Am I missing something? I'd really rather not switch back to Windows.

Edit: VulkanInfo is saying, "ERROR: [Loader Message] Code 0: loader_scanned_icd_add: Could not get 'vkCreateInstance' via..."

It also seems to only be showing my CPU, not gpu? Not certain, since I don't unstand a lot of the details, but it says, "deviceType = PHYSICAL_DEVICE_TYPE_CPU".

Edit 2: turning off secureboot fixed it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] AcornTickler@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

If you have to choose between one, then yes; full disk encryption is superior. But they should ideally be used in tandem.

Without secure boot, you are vulnerable to evil maid attacks. A bad actor can modify your bootloader (which has to remain unencrypted) in a way that allows them to steal your encryption keys. Secure Boot prevents running unsigned bootloaders, which negates this risk.

[–] savvywolf@pawb.social 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If someone has access to your device enough to modify your bootloader they could also just install a hardware keylogger or hidden camera and get your password that way.

[–] AcornTickler@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Sure, but that's much harder to do undetected. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. Secure Boot still prevents against particular types attacks.

[–] savvywolf@pawb.social 1 points 15 hours ago

I get that perfect is the enemy of good, but you also need to have defined threat models. Secure boot protects against people covertly taking your ssd, putting it in their own device, overwriting the OS with one that looks identical but is a key logger, and then putting it back in your system. Yet systems with secure boot have no tooling to stop attackers from just... Putting a hardware keylogger inline with the keyboard.