Slashdot Mirror
Linux GPU Performance
CrzyP writes "AnandTech.com has benchmarked the most popular graphics cards from ATI and NVidia on the Linux OS (SuSE 9.1). It is interesting to see that they have also written a custom benchmarking tool which can also be downloaded from the article. Take a look at Kristopher Kubicki's "Linux 3D AGP GPU Roundup" to see how each of the mid to high end cards performed on the Penguin flavored system."
Get that man on the KDE team IMMEDIATELY! His parents obviously had a grasp of the KDE naming convention long ago.
It's funny. Laugh.
Isn't NVidia refusing to allow driver support for recent linux kernels on some of their cards?
What good is good GPU performance if you have to run an old kernel to run the GPU at all?
Umm, you're supposed to be putting the Linux CDs into the CD drive, not taste-testing them... ;)
What does a penguin taste like, anyhow?
Wow, this is very surprising. One would expect with similar Windows benchmarks for the X800 to be matching or beating the 6800 Ultra (depending on drivers of course), so these low X800 scores in Linux really are quite a shock.
Those numbers are all well and good, but I'd be interested in seeing them side-by-side with the same tests performed (on the same machines, of course) running Windows.
There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
NVidia: Sort-of
ATI: Kind-of
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
We can run Linux on a GPU now?
is there any good use for GPUs on linux as of now? maybe so you could tell how awesome games would be if they were made?
The situation right now is quite frustrating - all distributions should be able to ship the binary drivers for the vendor kernel. It would make it so much easier, than having to get the kernel source and headers before building the module on your own. Thats an unneccesary burden only placed on our shoulders because of some paperwork. 2nd, id like some better drivers please, the ATI drivers are terrible, please stop treating me as a second rank costumer. My money is as good as anybody elses. Thanks so far NVIDIA, now we just need a better license.
What else could it be?
"High performance gaming on Linux certainly isn't for everyone. We spent weeks preparing for this analysis and we still ran into problems that we could not correct. So many times, we came to a solution for a problem only to find our Linux distribution had some files in a slightly different place or our file dependency tree was completely broken. These are the things that scare away people from Linux."
That is the 100% gospel truth. I couldn't have said it better myself. How then will the Linux community and game publishers overcome this (IMHO) enormous obstacle?
There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
If it weren't for the spinless Mesa developer for switching away from LGPL licence just to please the incompetent xfree crew, we would have major companies contributing open codes, instead of having them taking stuff and releasing slower, buggy, proprietary drivers.
Remember ALSA? It sticks its gun to GPL right down to the driver, and Creative actually donate SBLive driver for it, when the company was already crushing everyone else (Aureal included) sound card market! This should be how Mesa license the code, not the lame, bogus, xfree licence.
ATI has poor drivers? What a shocker. News flash at 11.
Mmmm.... Penguin flavored. *drool*
I noticed this test was run on SuSE. What's the "best" Linux version to run if I'm an experienced developer, comfortable in UNIX, but never tried Linux? I don't know much about Linux, but would like to put together a system for home tinkering. Is SuSE a good choice? Sorry for the Off-Topic post, but I figure picking the OS is as important as picking the GPU.
But I run Linux-2.6.8.1 with a Geforce FX 5700 and it works fine. I suspect you may have old information.
If it weren't for the spinless Mesa developer for switching away from LGPL licence at version 3.1 beta 2 just to please the incompetent xfree crew, we would have major companies contributing open codes, instead of having them taking stuff and releasing slower, buggy, proprietary drivers.
Remember ALSA? It sticks its gun to GPL right down to the driver, and Creative actually donate SBLive driver for it, when the company was already crushing everyone else (Aureal included) sound card market! This should be how Mesa license the code, not the lame, bogus, xfree licence.
Thanks to the moronic decisions of the Mesa team, it is too late to turn back now.
An excerpt from the article:
"So many times, we came to a solution for a problem only to find our Linux distribution had some files in a slightly different place or our file dependency tree was completely broken. These are the things that scare away people from Linux. Although customizing our own system, contravening the Microsoft "monopoly" and roughing-it-on-our-own were refreshing and challenging, this editor immediately fired up the Tribes: Vengence demo on Windows after the Linux testing and editing were complete. Total time to install and configure: 5 minutes, 40 seconds; now that was refreshing."
"NVIDIA's drivers provide Direct Rendering Infrastructure (DRI) support via SaX2 (the SuSE X configuration tool) as well. The DRI acts as somewhat of an abstraction layer between X Windows and OpenGL. We need the DRI module loaded with X Windows in order to run any OpenGL hardware acceleration. Without it, we are only running software acceleration."
This is absolutely wrong, Nvidia uses GLX, I haven't read the entire article yet, but this is utter crap. And it also isn't true that you need to recompile the kernel for both drivers...
Is it just me?!
For Windows users not familiar with the process, the kernel must be completely recompiled for ATI or NVIDIA drivers to work.
I don't know about the ATI drivers, but this isn't true for the NVIDIA drivers. You can download an installer from NVIDIA that will create a kernel module for you and places it with the other modules. No need to recompile the kernel at all. Just load the module (if the installer doesn't do this for you) and restart your X server.
see gpgpu.org for more information.
When I got a new video card (Geforce FX 5700) all I had to do was "emerge nvidia-kernel nvidia-glx" then "opengl-update nvidia" and change the chipset and videoram in my XF86Config. All of this took me about 1/2 hour, including installing the card.
On an nVidia MX 400 card, AA is playable and actually pretty fun online, but shadows are mostly chunks of squares on the ground. Otherwise, rpg's and smoke grenades look fantastic. I wonder why they didn't do comparisons of at least AA? I would think that's one of the first games people download for Linux especially because it's free.
Oh yeah, I had some original difficulty installing the nvidia drivers on a knoppix hd install with the 2.6 kernel, but I finally got it running well and documented the installation here: http://www.knoppix.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10314 &highlight=
Namaste
You can find my benchmarks of DRI compatible cards here. They're a first attempt at benchmarking DRI and still need some tweaking.
Eric Anholt's benchmarks of DRI on FreeBSD are here.
Roland Scheidegger's comparison of the three drivers available for the Radeon 9000 (DRI, FGLRX, XIG) is here.
It's a bit surprising that the Radeon 8500 series is completly absent from this comparison. The 8500 and FireGL 8800 are still remarkable video cards.
This is an incredible correction that needs to be known. Anonymous is correct, as the Nvidia installer uses the kernel headers to create it's own module which can be loaded by a simple xorg.conf change and reloading the X server.
There is -no- need to recompile the kernel unless they are referring to the old 2.6 kernel bug with the old nvidia drivers(the stacks bug). But that was a GLITCH that only lasted a week or two, and something quickly fixed (not to mention only really experienced by Fecora Core 2 users) by nvidia.
"We're breaking out the ramen noodles. . . "
"Really? Is it someone's birthday?"
I have an Nforce2 based MB with built-in video..
For a few months I ran Nvidia's proprietary driver but found that their support was poor. Countless people would report the same problem and Nvidia would basically just shrug and not even reply to the postings on their website. Stuff like "not our problem". They were very slow to support 2.6.
And as a gentoo user, I hated the binary installation program.
I finally dumped their stuff and went to the OSS driver. It is much slower, even when just opening new browser windows or xterms. But not having to mess with nvidia installer hell each time I gen a new kernel (which is pretty rare, actually) makes it worth it.
This was a great article, however, because it shows just how much chance and luck there is in getting these drivers to work. Buying the latest and greatest MB and CPU for use with Linux is still a huge unknown for the novice and experienced Linux user alike. And then there is the very real fear of whether it will work after you upgrade your kernel, etc.
Sad to see that Nvidia is the most Linux friendly vendor??
In my opinion this is the best thing to happen to linux in some time. Any time that you can develop standards for an industry, you can finally give a target for competitors to aim at (e.g. each other). This will drive competition and really drive the market forward. I would consider this a first step forward.
After both ATI and nVidia clobber each other with better framerates and better overall performance, I think that a new competitive advantage will develop... perhaps this may be better graphics quality or easier installs.
Victory is gained, not in knowing your opponents next move, but in preempting them.
No need to recompile the kernel, true - but you'll have to have your kernel's source installed in order for NVIDIA's installer to compile a custom module on the spot.
All in all, it does work really well...until you upgrade or replace your kernel, and then X of course won't work. Many times you can run the installer again, though. Simple enough!
Anytime you upgrade or replace the kernel, just run the binary again before loading X (you aren't booting straight into x, are you?). Nvidia updates the module, reinstalls the new module while removing the old one, and bam. Now boot up X.
"We're breaking out the ramen noodles. . . "
"Really? Is it someone's birthday?"
Planning to plunk down some money soon and what I want to know is: What is the best video card you can get that works in Linux that *doesn't* require binary drivers? I don't perticularly care to be locked into one kernel if given the option. -Benjamin Meyer
Do you changes clothes while making the "chee-chee-cha-cha-choh" transformation sound?
Even with my shiny new (-ish) Radeon 9800, I can only get around 80 fps in glxgears - because ATI's drivers don't support Xinerama, I'm stuck with the functional, but much slower, open-source drivers. The framerates AnandTech are be getting single-headed are a dream for me.
However, having read the article, ATI claim to have some Linux announcements in the pipeline - with any luck, maybe these drivers will allow me to use both my monitors with some decent 3d acceleration.
Anyway, to anyone thinking of getting an ATI card for use with multiple monitors under linux: caveat emptor.
Gentoo is very flexible and configurable, and can keep you on the bleeding edge of software versions. It also takes a long time to set up.
Debian Stable and RedHat Advanced Server are very slow changing, but behind the times. The stability is good in some situations.
Suse (reportedly) has a slick installer. I haven't used it.
I prefer Gentoo, but I've got a herd of machines to handle and 9 years of experience with Linux.
I don't get why some users complain about rebooting, linux and windows alike. In a company/mission critical server type situation I could see it, but for home use? My Windows XP machine takes a total of 20 seconds to shut down, pass BIOS, reboot, and hit the desktop ready to work. In that twenty seconds (which mind you, isn't very long to begin with) I can actually do that thing we forget to do, and stretch my legs and arms. Grab a cup of water, hell.. even look out the window.
The same with my slackware machine. About 25-30 seconds for a reboot. None of that bothers me because I -know- 30 seconds on my home machine doesn't mean a damn thing. I'll enjoy that time to rub my eyes, refresh myself with maybe spending that 30 seconds taking all the dishes out of the room back up to the kitchen.
Don't treat 30 seconds as a long and unbearable time unless you want to start complaining about having a manually flushing toliet in your home, followed by hands that can't wash themselves.
"We're breaking out the ramen noodles. . . "
"Really? Is it someone's birthday?"
Any questions?
This binary driver thing has got to go. As Linux gains desktop market share, pressure will increase to open up the hardware interface to the driver. It's not like hooking OpenGL to the card involves any technology that isn't well known in the industry.
Most of the popular ones available for Linux have ebuilds. Just pop in the CD, mount it, and emerge the game.
A dedicated distro for gaming on Linux. End of story.
Until EVERYONE adheres to some sort of guidelines (HA! Yeah, RIGHT!), people are going to be dealing with oddball dependancies, kernel/driver issues, and filesystem layout annoyances.
Documentation all around needs to improve too, for both the Linux distros and the game makers.
There are OpenSource drivers for Nvidia video cards, however they are no where near as fast as the official binaries and can't preform 3d worth a damn.
You have to realise what you are asking here. The binary drivers that you are mentioning (which, by the way, never lock you to a certain kernel) are using the code made by ATI/NVIDIA to take advantage of their hardware's features. PixelShading, 3d processing. Each have their own way for their hardware to preform 3d functioning. This is not something they are going to disclose (they are a buisness too, remember?) and thus the open source drivers for video cards are always going to be horrid compared to the avalaible binaries.
Seriously though. Get a card that works great on linux despite the binary packaging. And I still don't see how it locks you into one kernel? Could you explain further in depth what you mean for me? Because upgrading nvidia (which must be done each time you update/replace your kernel) is as simple as shutting down the X server, rerunning the nvidia binary, and then rebooting the X server.
"We're breaking out the ramen noodles. . . "
"Really? Is it someone's birthday?"
Soo-See
This is similar to the problems that I have faced (and many others too I am sure) in getting linny & nvidia to play nice together.
Hardware:
AMD AthlonXP 2600+
1.5GB ram
Nvidia Ti4600
1st attempt: Mandrake v10.0
I ran the Nvidia driver installer and it would state: "Nvidia driver installed..."
In Mandrake's config files it did report that I was using the correct card.
No splash screen and GL games ran like a hog (software emulation it felt like).
I played around with the xfree86.conf (I think that's the name) file, switching "nv" with "nvidia" and back again.
No splash screen.
I then loaded Suse v9.1 It detected the correct video card at installation AND I got the Nvidia splash-screen at boot.
but
the DVI output on my card wouldn't work.
Any suggestions?
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
Sue Say
And much better, with a stock X.org server so we can see how the cards match up when they use the open software. For many of us, it's more important to have the stability of a full open source system.
Soo-suh
DRI lets X communicate with the hardware faster. X acceleration works without it, but not as well.
from Gentoo Hardware 3D Acceleration Guide.
My 9500 Pro still doesn't work and just crashes the system hard when 3D acceleration is enabled. Nobody knows this problem and nobody can explain. :(
Not only are you acting biased, but you are giving incorrect information. Let's start on the BSD part.
You say its not an option because it is no longer being developed. I say you are wrong. In fact, the website of OpenBSD says you are wrong too:
OpenBSD is freely available from our FTP sites, and also available in an inexpensive 3-CD set. The current release is OpenBSD 3.5 which started shipping May 1, 2004.
OpenBSD 3.6, our next release, will be made available for FTP on November 1, 2004. It can be ordered now (CDs are already shipping!)
In fact, Freebsd has already released their 5.3 beta and is having people test it out as we speak (look at their news page).
So, your views on BSD and where it is at in the world are completely inaccurate and misguided. So, because of just that alone, I don't see why I should trust -any- of your other advice above.
"We're breaking out the ramen noodles. . . "
"Really? Is it someone's birthday?"
Me too!
Are you sure your card supports dual output? Some only support one or the other but not both at once; try plugging in your DVI monitor on boot and making sure the CRT is unplugged from the card (or it will take precedence).
If both should work simultaneously, look at TwinView settings in the NVidia driver README and edit your XF86Config.
Option "TwinView"
Option "SecondMonitorHorizSync" "31-60"
Option "SecondMonitorVertRefresh" "50-75"
Option "MetaModes" "1024x768, 1024x768"
#Option "TwinViewOrientation" "RightOf"
#Option "TwinViewOrientation" "LeftOf"
Option "TwinViewOrientation" "Clone"
#Option "NvAGP" "1"
That's why ATI's crappy drivers suck. That entire page seems to be bitching exclusively about ATI's drivers. Apparently the commentary on the Nvidia drivers was on the previous page and went something like "We told it to install in yast and went init 3 and it worked." I paraphrase. In fact, only a paragraph or two on the previous page talk about Nvidia's driver, in glowing terms. The rest of it is complaining about ATI driver configuration. Then the next page (Where you got that quote) is talking about ATI driver configuration.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
frankly its a joke
nvidia has always fscked around trying to get mangled source into XFree
ATI where unable to understand what this linux thing was but people who ati trusted wrote drivers...
solution - provide the chip spec's
frankly with CG and other GPU compilers the hardware should be patented if not then what harm is there ?
giving out spec with COPYRIGHT stamped all over it only supports you
for example those XGI people could capture the market by opens sourceing the drivers (they failed under SIS because of the drivers so let people hunt bugs WITH you for a better product and respect...)
regards
John Jones
Are the drivers for older ATi cards oss? I put together a machine from spare parts and it has an old Rage128 card that works like gangbusters in openGL. If this isn't open source then I would say the best truly open 3d performance will be had from an SiS based setup. I have an SiS7xx based motherboard that has served me well for about two years and it uses all open source parts. The driver doesn't install 3d support ootb in either suse or mdk, but they're available from the website of the fellow who maintains the driver packages for linux.
And for the record: the Sis based board worked damn near flawlessly from the moment of install. The MN31N doesn't even run mdk10 ootb (it crashes randomly and usually can't even complete the installer) but it kinda sorta works OK with suse91. - if you can tolerate all the other crap that's broken (like the entire gnome desktop) in Suse. Basically, I got this mbd because I got a good price and I wanted to try out the MCP-T sound support (which so far completely sucks, but that's another story) and because it has built in dualhead support. I managed to get things working ok with mdk10.1 community, but I don't believe I will ever buy another board that requires proprietary binary drivers in order to access all those wonderful "features." In so many ways, it just ain't worth the trouble.
NVidia provides binary drivers precompiled for the most common distors - RedHat, Fedora, Suse, Mandrake. They can't possibly provide binaries for all of them.
Compiling your own is the price you pay for using a less popular distro. I have to compile my own in Gentoo as well. Not that I mind, it takes all of 10 seconds.
NVidia previously withheld their Nforce GART drivers, forcing those without Nforce boards to be unable to use their non-NVidia AGP cards. The NVidia graphics card drivers had the Nforce GART in them, so that NVidia graphics cards users could still use them on Nforce boards. People wanting to run ATI cards on Nforce boards were screwed for many months until NVidia finally released their drivers officially. I got around this only by obtaining a leaked kernel patch with Nforce GART.
Fire up my Gentoo install, and the game is terrible at the same res, with all graphical settings at "Lowest" or "Off". I could probably play at like 800x600, but I like running things on my LCD's native resolution.
Of course, that's why I still have a Windows partition in the first place.
I gathered some experience with the ATI drivers on Suse 9.1 recently and i too think that they're bad, but it got a little better lately.
/usr/src/linux/.config.
/sbin/modprobe --ignore-install fglrx && { /sbin /modprobe nvidia_agp; /bin/true; } alias char-major-226-0 fglrx
While there *is* an "auto-installing" driver-package from ATI you'd better avoid that (unless they fixed a good number of bugs). Just running the package resulted in an error for me, googling around i found some hints and managed to install them: run the package in extract-mode, make manually, ignore error, make install accompanied by some messing with
there is also (for Suse 9.1) an rpm-package. Following the README in that path closely will get the video driver installed. Like nvidia ATIs driver combo too consists of a kernel driver and a n X-driver, and as usual the kernel-driver is a little fiddly to install. There is *no* (longer?) need to compile a custom kernel, you need to install the kernel source though (and really, read the README!).
Be careful though when configuring the XF86config. fglrxconfig is *not* a good idea since it asks you about mouse settings, monitor modes and whatnot, things that are running perfectly well and shouldn't be touched anyway. NVIDIA does a much better job just telling you the few lines you have to change in the config, fglrxconfig produces an XF86config-4 that is mostly useless and contains heaps of garbage.
To make the kernelmodule load automatically add two lines to the "modprobe.conf.local" (i think the first is unnecessary):
install fglrx
In XF86config load "glx" and "dri" in the Modules sections and put
Driver "fglrx"
Option "UseInternalAGPGART" "no"
in the device section. If you've got access problems put:
Section "DRI"
Group "video"
Mode 0666
EndSection
After restarting the X-server (twice to be sure, and check if the kernel module loaded) "fglrxinfo" should tell you something about ATI (and not Mesa), if that works do a "sync" for good measure and try tuxracer.
In my experience the nvidia-drivers are definitely easier to install, but it's really not impossible to get the ATI-stuff running.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
Seriously.
Why post anon?
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
Try making sure that 1) you're using ALSA drivers 2) Your OSS-Free emulation driver allows for multiplexing (ala Direct X). So that way artsd and Wolfenstein can play nice together.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
Fortresses don't have windows.
Debian users might find it easier to use Flavio Stanchina's ATI debian packages and HOWTO. I found these much easier to install.
Here they are.
Mobo, Vid and cpu = same.
If linux was faster I would actually switch... I spend so much time tweaking windows maybe linux would be easier...
If you're SCO, it's pronounced "Sues".
---
Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
(I read with sigs off.)
What is the Racer game they use as one of the benchmarks? At first I assumed they meant TuxRacer but then it describes driving a car, not a penguin.
Freshmeat gives two other possibilites, neither of which seem quite right.
Nunber one Why.
Linux systems normally no need to reboot(I have a key linked to serial port to force init 3 fixs a dead X11 interface so I can init 5 to reset it one day I will add a second button ie init 3 and init 5).
Just because the graphic interface dies why do I have to unloaded all drivers?
I install a new kernel most cases no reboot until normal shutdown and startup the next day. Video drivers most offten can be installed in init 3 mode.
The reason my machine shares files people get very upset when the files they want are off line ie a windows driver update would force me to kick them out. A linux driver update no they keep on working (the slowdown of a kernel being build a root still gets a few yells)
Basicly you cannot get away with rebooting servers. Note windows also uses a dirty trick Called after loading XP not afterloading takes twice the time of suse default install starting up. ie 30 secs not 15. 15 secs are been hidden from normal users. Start playing a game quake2 or bigger of the start line and ask why its it slower to load than when I let the machine sit for a min ie if fully loaded there should not still be stuff loading slowing stuff down.
Also XP does a non safe I will kill you and I hope you can sort it out. Linux says program I am killing you please get your affiars in order I will wait if asked.
Allso try playing Quake 2 and other games only to have the computer blue screen of death while you are winning.
With all the news on the GeForce 6600GT lately, I would have hoped that they showed its placing in the benchmarks here... particularly since I've had my eyes on buying this card ever since Slashdot mentioned it.
What a rip-off.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
You mean like my Zoran TV tuner card that hasnt worked since the 2.2 series, despite their being public specs and sources for it? Drivers are only maintained as long as the developer is around. And unless you have the skills to write your own drivers (and most of us, including large numbers of application developers, *don't*), the having specs/source or not is irrelevant.
Why not offer to pay an open source developer to update it ? At least you have that option, independent of the manufacturer's support for doing so.
You going to have the same problem with Linux kernel version 4.0, when Nvidia don't provide a driver for their XYZ card in 2010. Problem is, at that time, you won't have access to the specs, so you won't even have the option of paying an open source developer to update the driver for you.
The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf
DRI Project
The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf
I imagine it's true for most popular distros, in that it's recommended to use the distros package rather than the nvidia installer.
On gentoo at least, there are a multitude of scripts available that will check your foreign modules against the running kernel on bootup. If they find they were compiled against a different one, they will recompile pointing at your new kernel tree, and then restart the respective services (X, lircd, etc), making upgrades stupidly easy. I imagine people have made similar scripts or utils for pretty much every major mainstream distro.
I haven't used it since the RH9 days, but I am told if you run the nvidia installer, it also includes binaries for specific kernel versions from major distros, so if you're a n00b you don't even need the kernel source - it'll sense you're running the latest version of Fedora or whatever and plug the modules in without needing to compile anything.
Moderation Total: -1 Troll, +3 Goat
Unfortunately, its not open source
There have been misunderstandings about the source code in the past time. This project is NOT OpenSource. The source code IS and will REMAIN for the oncoming time copyright (c) of Ruud van Gaal / Dolphinity BV. The source code is provided for general interest, and to build platform-specific versions (for Linux mainly) in case the provided binaries don't work.
All suggested changes to the source code will be reviewed by me, but before you do that, realise that the source code will remain copyrighted. Fixes are appreciated ofcourse, but I would advise against putting much into bigger things.
Link to statement
All the NVidia cards are, more or less, supported with Linux drivers when they ship. I've had my ATI Radeon Mobility 9700 since March. Still no ATI-accelerated drivers. This is a common trend -- ATI very frequently supports only their older cards under GNU/Linux. Now I see why -- apparently, their newer cards underperform older NVidia cards, so no clueful GNU/Linux user would buy them anyways.
"In fact, you are lucky to get anything from nVIDIA or ATI."
Gee! And we talk about how powerful we are. Guess the caffine wore off.
Since the Linux kernel does not support a binary driver interface, we provide for rebuilding these files on the target machine (or distribution) and then linking with the binary version of the NV kernel driver.
And yes, there are two packages: a display package and a sound/networking package.
Both contain proprietary, closed source modules.
The big difference seems to be that in GEForce mode, some extra bugs that mess up high-end animation applications are turned on.
That probably has more to do with the issue than any "proprietary technology".
They have actually put up a downloadable CSV of the results for us techies:u x/gpu_roun dup/fps.csv
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/lin
Now that's really nice. If they would make this a regular feature, it would enable regular readers of anandtech to stock up on CSVs of hardware they might want to buy in the future.
if any of you AnandTech chaps are reading this,
Excellent idea guys! keep it up.
Find a job you like and you will never work a day in your life.
Can we compile linux to run on the GPU?
If you already have a working driver on one platform, it is cheaper to rewrite that driver than it is to write a new one. If you do this over several design iterations of your product, you can develop a design system where platform dependent code is separated from platform independent code in such a way that you have to make few changes to the platform dependent code per product. I.e. platform dependent code will be most product independent and product dependent code will be most platform independent.
To respond using your numbers as a base: if it costs $1M USD to develop a MS Windows driver, then I would expect it to cost less to develop a Linux driver from the MS Windows driver, perhaps $100K. Thus, even though your Linux numbers are wildly optimistic (Linux is closer to 3% than 10%), it is not nearly as bad as it seems at first.
Another issue is that video cards are a competitive market. Even if the overall market is only 3%, it is worth noting that by having the better driver, that company gets most of the 3%. They have to split the 90% from MS Windows.
It's also worth noting that MS Windows sales are largely through OEMs and get the OEM discount. Linux sales are largely singletons and get the retail premium. Thus, Linux users as a group are somewhat more profitable than MS Windows users as a group.
Finally, nVidia makes motherboard chipsets as well as video chipsets. By producing the better video drivers, they encourage people to buy their motherboards as well. ATI otoh, produces Mac and Sun video cards; thus, they already need to maintain platform independent code. This makes it much easier to produce lousy drivers, which they do so as to keep a toe in the market.
HAND.
If that's too much typing for you,(without any spaces put there by Slashdot) yields: http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/linux/gpu_rou