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."
They did not use a XT or XTPE, only the Pro. The Pro never beats an Ultra and rarely bests the GT:
http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2044
Not really, it is common knowledge that Nvidia's linux binary drivers are much better than Ati's. Not only the performance is better in Nvidia's drivers but they are also more compatible. People often had problems getting ATI's binary drivers working, while Nvidia's drivers are working without problem in most configurations and even problems like 4k stacks were fixed withhin a reasonable time.
Jan
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.
The way they always do: arrogantly.
Joe Gamer will be told to fix the patch himself, or encounter condescending jerks telling him everything but a workable solution on forums across the web. He may find a HOWTO, but will be discouraged when he realizes all the HOWTOs are written for computer science majors who are familiar with every other aspect of GNU/Lunix EXCEPT the subject of the HOWTO.
So instead of being able to use Lunix as he wishes, he'll have to deal with an annoying kluge until he either gets tired of it and gives up or the weekly version upgrade of package X and dependent package Y stumble on a fix.
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.
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!
Linux Nvidia drivers perform just as good or even better than in windows.
There wasn't Quake3 test in this review, but ut2004 was said to run faster. As for Q3, I've tested it myself: runs 5-6% faster.
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?"
Well, that's the game's problem, not Linux's. And at least UT2004 has absolutely no problem - just run the GUI installer.
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.
I'm not sure what distro you're using, but with suse 9.1, no such contortions are needed. I simply checked the box in yast that says "install nvidia drivers" and a message popped up saying "nvidia drivers will take effect next time X is restarted".
The article contained some incorrect statements as well - in particular, claiming that the kernel must somehow be "recompiled" to allow the nvidia drivers to be installed. That's never been true, so seeing such a statement is mystifying.
To recap, with suse 9.1 and nvidia drivers:
recompile kernel? no
edit config files? no.
time to install drivers? about 30 seconds.
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.
Well the NVIDIA driver installer does build a module that matches your kernel. I run Debian, and i had to apt-get the kernel source and headers, not a terrible task to do, but should not be necessary to do, just to get the newest driver. I dident say the kernel need recompilation. And you need to modify the XF86Config-4 file from "nv" to "nvidia" in the driver section and thats about it. 30 seconds is about the time yes, but only after i got the kernel headers and source, some 30-40 mbs of source, not that it matters on 10mbit, but for dialups, that would kinda suck i guess :).
It took nVidia a while to get around to releasing a driver that could deal with 4K stacks, which more recent kernels have switched to from 8K. It was a pain in the posterior for Fedora Core 2 for a while, but no longer. Maybe that's what you're referring to?
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?"
You're mostly right about not needing to recompile. But it depends on the distro.
If you don't have the kernel source that was used to build the kernel you're running, you'll need to either obtain it, or in many cases, obtain the latest kernel source and build a kernel to match it.
Wasting the space to have the kernel sources around is pretty sucky just to upgrade a video driver. I'm thinking small, set-top or embedded gaming machines, like something jammed into an arcade cabinet.
But, what the hell, I already waste all that space for portage, just to make installing stuff somewhat less of a headache.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Actually, it already compiles for the most recent kernel (2.6.8-rc3) so I guess "big driver push" really means something else this time. Maybe 64 bit support. :p
8 851616952&w=2
Oh and they've hired some guy called Michel from the DRI project; http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=dri-devel&m=10941
*shrug*
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. :(
OEM Radeon 8500 based cards are cheap and are among the fastest cards with open source 3D drivers.
>open konsole then open gnome-terminal and place
..) are using gtk for completely different reasons: qt is gpl'ed *not* lgpl'ed and it's only available in windows under a non-gpl license.
...
>them side by side.konsole, like all QT apps, has >needless bordering everywhere,
funny, i see many more borders is gnome-terminal ?!?!
>This is why many notably amazing Linux apps
>(GIMP, gaim, evolution, hell even firefox)
>reject QT in favor of GTK.
gimp is the origin of gtk, i would be surprised to see gimp using qt.
gaim, evolution and firefox (and nautilus and abiword and
believe me, if qt was lgpl'ed only gimp would use gtk. qt is just so much easier
Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
That's the difference between a vendors that supports you and one that doesn't.
NVidia isn't a problem under Linux because they actually put out decent drivers for it. But ATI support is horrid, because the company barely puts any effort into Linux drivers.
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"
I played around with the xfree86.conf (I think that's the name) file, switching "nv" with "nvidia" and back again.
The binary driver is called nvidia. So switch it to that, and leave it.
Read the log file (/var/log/XFree86.0.log), look for lines with (WW) and (EE). This will go a long way to track down your problems.
the DVI output on my card wouldn't work.
Do you mean a second video port? Under Linux the second port (video output) is independent of the first in the XFree86 configuration, so you have to configure it to use it explicitly. Something like 'Screen 1' or 'Option "ConnectedMonitor" "DFP" ' in the Section 'Device' should do it.
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
I believe that's what the Linux Standards Base people are trying to fix. I've spoken to them at Linux world. Their goal is to eventually be able to have developers say "This program can run on any distro LSB1.0 compliant."
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
No, he was right.
There is a market. ATI has sold X cards. These cards, hardware wise, can be used identically on Linux or Windows, its only software thats needed to adapt to the system. If 90% of those cards went to Windows users and 10% went to Linux users, here is why the Linux driver is more expensive per unit sold.
Let's assume driver development costs a fixed number per OS, Y. Let's assume that its equal for Linux and Windows. Thus, every driver ATI develops costs them Y out of their profits.
The cost-per-card for Windows driver Y/(0.9X). The cost for Linux drivers, similarly, is Y/(0.1X). 0.9X > 0.1X unless X is zero. So, unless ATI sells NO cards at all, its cheaper to develop for the majority of the market-share. I.E. Windows.
Considering that desktop market share for Linux is around 3%, and Windows comes in around 90%, its significantly more expensive to support Linux than Windows, even if you assume that the ratio of ATI Linux users to Windows users is probably a little bit better (a large portion of those Windows users have cheapie integrated Intel graphics).
---
Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
(I read with sigs off.)
KDE's performance is fine.
Really? Every time I have compared KDE and Gnome on a lowend computer (300-500MHz 128-256MB RAM) the result have been the same. Gnome was way faster than KDE.
What they need is better usability,
Maybe KDE is not perfect, but I don't know any GUI which is better than KDE.
better defaults,
I'm sure most people (including me) will agree with that. But that is all they could agree about. Because everybody want different settings, and no default will satisfy everybody. Better just let each user configure the environment as he preffers.
open konsole then open gnome-terminal and place them side by side.
No, I don't want to do that. I don't like any of them. Having both of them side by side would just be too much. I only use them to start an xterm anyway, that is until I get around to replace the launcher icon with one that will launch an xterm.
This is why many notably amazing Linux apps (GIMP, gaim, evolution, hell even firefox) reject QT in favor of GTK.
I don't think so. A lot of people rejected QT because of license issues. AFAIK the license is no longer a problem, but there is not really much point in switching from GTK to QT. Switching would require some amount of code to be rewritten, so a very good reason would be needed.
I don't think the GIMP people ever whined about it. They needed a toolkit, and apparantly none could satisfy their needs, so they wrote one: The GIMP ToolKit.
Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
I don't know about you but I tend to do several things in parallel on my PC most of the time which accounts for several open webpages in my browser, an open MP3-Player, open Movie-Player, SSH-Sessions to other machines, IRC-Client, ICQ-Client,...
Now why the hell should I have to close all that and open it again (which takes at least several minutes) for some minor change like installing new Software?
Linux is not Windows
I think it was either Icculus or Carmack that said the subsystems of Linux (primarily the kernel) were more efficient than Windows and all other things being equal, Linux would out perform Windows.
Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
As others have mentioned, the best cards with open drivers are based on ATI's R200 chipset. These cards include the Radeon 8500 and 9100, and FireGL 8700 and 8800. While the FireGL 8800 is probably fastest, it is also crazy expensive. The 9100 is a rebadged 8500 with different core and memory clock speeds. I have been told the 8500 should be faster, but have never seen any benchmark proving one to be faster than the other.
I am not sure how fast the ViaCLE266 is, but it does not matter since it is a chipset for motherboards, and I do not think it is available as a card. I read a review somewhere claiming it was decent, which given the time since the 8500's release may mean it is the roughly the same, worse, or better. It has totally open drivers.
S3's DeltaChrome (S4/S8) is suppose to get an open source driver released from S3. Also it has been claimed people who are not S3 have received the specs necessary to write drivers for the card. Via is S3's parent corporation, and these announcements were made at approximately the same time Via opensourced the CLE266 driver and the driver for their hardware mpeg decoder. DeltaChrome cards are not yet available in the United States. They were suppose to be available quite awhile back. They are available in Asia and Europe and have been for a few months now. Any DeltaChrome card (even the budget S4) would smoke an anceint Radeon 8500, but I do not know that I would wait forever for DeltaChrome boards and linux drivers to appear.