• Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wayland cuts out all of the dead features and allows content to be drawn to the screen more directly. This means that there is a simplified architecture with great battery life.

    • 0x4E4F@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Other than that, it doesn’t really bring much to the table currently. Not everyone needs (or wants) HDR and many of the other features that I would like to have are still in the works, so… I don’t really see a reason to use it, at least not now.

      • Geth@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Support for HDR, variable refresh rate, direct draw and battery improvements sound like a very good list to have, other than the overall leaner build. You personally not caring about it doesn’t change the fact that it’s good to not stagnate when it comes to things like this.

        • 0x4E4F@sh.itjust.worksOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          VFR 🤨… I mean, does anyone actually use that? It flopped for video content, I seriously doubt anyone is gonna use that on a PC.

          DirectDraw is an MS specific thing, part of DirectX. How does that fit into Wayland?

          The second, I would actually LOVE to get in any frame server, X or Wayland, but that will most probably never happen.

          • Westlyroots@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            Variable refresh rate has become the de facto standard of modern gaming now. They aren’t referring to the direct draw API, but the fact that Wayland does not have extra baggage to draw to the screen through a display server. Wayland just draws to the screen directly, saving time and performance.

          • HolyDuckTurtle@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            VRR is fantastic for games, I really notice the difference and I use Wayland because of it.

            The downside to that is (from my understanding) Wayland forces some form of Vsync on everything, so if you don’t have a VRR monitor then games can become very stuttery and have noticeable input lag. There is an option to “force lowest latency” which supposedly allows screen tearing for things like games, though I didn’t test how well it worked myself.

            If people are interested in experimenting, then VRRTest is a great utility to see what VRR is doing and to test various settings.

      • Willem@kutsuya.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        The biggest feature of Wayland for me is mixed refreshrate monitors works OOB. On X this is a pain to get even remotely working and it’s impossible if your monitors aren’t dividable (120/60 works, 144/60 stutters).

        This is from my experience something that is starting to be a way more common issue (high refreshrate laptops with 60 external monitors at businesses or high refreshrate monitor for gaming and a smaller secondary monitor for info lookup/discord).

        other than that, Xorg does win the “more stable” prize for me, but if I wanted stability, I should’ve become a carpenter.

        • Something Burger 🍔@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          The biggest feature of Wayland for me is mixed refreshrate monitors works OOB. On X this is a pain to get even remotely working

          Literally just plug the monitor and it works. Is this what Wayland people consider hard? No wonder they won’t implement anything remotely complex in their protocol.

          • Westlyroots@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Mixed refresh rates do not work because X technically is not doing multi monitor. Both monitors are rendered from the same “screen” that uses one refresh rate. If it’s running at 144hz, the 60 fps screen gets frame pacing issues. If it runs at 60, then the 144hz monitor is slow and gets frame pacing issues, and from most anecdotes and videos I’ve seen, it’s usually the latter and a pain to fix. If you wanted perfect frame pacing on both, you’d have to have the X11 screen set to 8640hz, which I don’t even think can render on modern systems. Wayland, on the other hand, just has multi monitor support built in and actively used. Each display has its own screen and renders at its preferred refresh rate, giving perfect frame rates and frame times for both.

        • NoisyFlake@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          144/60 works fine for me on X. I only had to disable Vsync for the compositor. Games now run at full 144Hz on my main monitor, and the other two are running perfectly fine at 60Hz.

          Though I’m still waiting for the day that I can finally make the jump to Wayland when nvidia support improves (or I have enough money for a new AMD GPU).

          • Westlyroots@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            If you’re using the latest Nvidia drivers, try it out. I heard support improved dramatically with the latest releases.