Now when it comes to package management I'm neutral, I have no technical preference. The Linux Standard Base lists RedHat's Package Management (RPM) system as the standard. RPM is great, but then Arch use Pacman is also excellent, I have no problem with either. Personally, I like Debian's Apt system, but only because I know it. So the fact that antiX is based on Debian Testing is perfect for me as it inherits Debian's package management system. I was also impressed to discover that Core ships with an installer-stub of the excellent smxi script (see smxi.org for a lot more information).
So when playing World of Warcraft in 25 man events, with all the graphical effects in full flow, what is my frame rate? Well, it varies but it rarely dips below 9 fps (frames per second). Windows users with mid range Nvidia cards (like mine) will be laughing their asses off with frame rates in the tens (45 – 90 fps in Windows 7, if not more). However, after having the game grind to a complete halt for seconds on end and report 0 fps, 9 fps is not only a substantial improvement but eminently playable. OK, there is some (minor) visible clipping with only 9 frames every second, but in 10 man, 5 man and solo content the game doesn't need so much processing power and 45fps is not unreasonable. If anyone tells you frame rates above 25fps is absolutely necessary, they need to get out more. 20 fps - is completely playable and we approach the number of frame that the human eye is able discern as being separate at all - is smooth as silk. Linux Mint 14 with Xfce cannot sustain multiple frame rates in 25 man content, 10 man content is delivered adequately with 20+ fps.
Clearly antiX Linux M12 Core with Xfce delivers in terms of my gaming requirements. With your hardware your mileage may vary. World of Warcraft is an eight year old game so any modern title released in the last couple of years, without a native Linux version, will struggle to run on any build of Linux. Wine is a workaround to the problem of major games manufacturers, thus far, refusing to release Linux ports of their titles. The only solution is native Linux titles. If Steam truly delivers it could be a game changer.
We've long argued, quite correctly, that Linux can free you from the bloat of millions of lines of redundant code, services, processes and applications running constantly when not needed. Getting some graphically bleeding edge games titles, written for the Linux platform, will give us the opportunity to demonstrate how Linux can allow games to deliver significantly better frame rates and performance on the same hardware. If Steam makes Linux a viable platform gamers will see the possible performance gains of jumping off the Microsoft ship. If there is ever going to be a Year of the Linux Desktop gaming will be in the vanguard, no other enthusiast computer users consume performance computer equipment consumption that drives games and graphical hardware development. We have reached an interesting juncture.