AMD Radeon Performance Preview On Linux 3.8
skade88 writes "If you are like me, the proud owner of a Radeon card, and feeling left out of the Linux graphics driver revolution that swept Nvidia cards recently, then stay tuned — there might be hope for us seeing better graphics performance in the Linux 3.8 kernel."
... never buy tech on a promise.
Or one of those losers that only uses intel, or android, or iOS....when can this crap stop?
A good geek/hacker uses the best tool for the job, or at least the tool they have :)
The hacker defines the tool, the tool does not define the hacker.
I like how things are shaping up, without the lockups of course.
But it still stands that if you want the most out of the card, the official drivers are still the only way to go.
unless the hacker is a tool
If you are like me, the proud owner of a Radeon card...
I have several GPUs that I test with. I've never been more proud than when I've fixed my own code to work around a tricky bug in the proprietary Radeon driver, so that some folks with that card could still use my software. That's because I'm proud of myself for my dedication to end users, not because of some name brand on a piece of abandoned hardware... So, no, I'm not like you; Unless you're just proud in general, not in relation to the GPU you own.
Don't get me wrong, I've had to work around many other GPU vendor driver bugs over the years, from Voodoo to GeForce. My point is this: Who gives a damn if you own a piece of hardware, but don't have access to the full software stack required to operate and maintain it. I swear we were all much better off with software rasterizers. At least then the devs could Actually FIX BUGS, rather than tell users to upgrade a driver or that they're just SoL. Thus, as for being proud of the GPU vendors Intel is the only brand on my list that's (moderately) relevant today.
"Proud owner"? It's a fucking video card, loser boy.
This is often said facetiously. He could have felt burned. I assume it's for a $400 Radeon, not a $50 Radeon, since it's hardly worth putting much effort into the latter (just buy an Intel).
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Seriously, I don't know. I don't really use desktop linux, I mostly use it for servers and data forensics. Perhaps somebody could fill me in? And everybody else who doesn't know while they're at it.
Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
I admit to not really knowing or caring about graphics cards (not a gamer), but skimming through TFA's charts, it looks like almost every test had more or less the same performance out of 3.7 and 3.8.
Am I missing something?
Three Squirrels
He could have felt burned. I assume it's for a $400 Radeon, not a $50 Radeon, since it's hardly worth putting much effort into the latter (just buy an Intel).
Can you buy Intel cards? All the web shops have hundreds of ATI and nVidia-based cards, and nothing else (well, possibly a weird new Matrox thing for $700). Personally I use a Matrox card from back when they were good (G450 or something) but it's an AGP card and I'm screwed if I buy a new motherboard ...
Issue is flash is outdated and filled with holes on Linux with no hardware acceleration. Even Mac was a second class citizen until last year in that regard which is shocking considering how many Adobe users are hardcore Mac users.
I have come to the conclusion that if you need to do anything with multimedia then Windows is a better solution. Or a Mac if you have more money and like Unix but want usability and more commercial apps.
Also have you tried VMWare or Virtualbox? VMWare workstation is competitively prices and has decent graphics support with its VMWare tools. Virtualbox has its tools too but I have not tried them on Linux. VNC is slow.
If you PC is old consider buying a new with hardware virtualization. You will not know how you lived without htem unless you use one. A cheap AMD has virtualization for even its cheapest piledriver cpu and chipset. qemu is not the best.
http://saveie6.com/
I was in college in the University of Limerick with the Irish developer behind the drm-next tree, and he's a really great guy. He was a member of Skynet, (the UL Computer Society) along with some other people that have gone on to be fairly visible members of the wordlwide Linux community, including the likes of:
:D
Mel Gorman, kernel memory hacker;
Dave Airlie. AMD graphics developer,
Caolan McNamara, who did the first MSWord converter.
Irish Linux hackers FTW
- This sig deliberately left blank. Nothing to see, move along.
I'm in the market for a new desktop PC. Currently have an old nVidia card, and haven't had any serious problems.
I don't do gaming, but love my 3D desktop effects. The new machine's for Android development. My old one doesn't run eclipse very well, and the latest Android emulators are downright painfully slow on it. But other than that, the box has served me well for 8 years, and it was a cheapo AMD box back then (have since added the cheap nVidia card and some memory). So, I think I'm looking for a fairly cheap desktop today. Fast intel or amd processor, but nothing fancy. Most of the cheap boxes these days seem to come with AMD/ATI combos, but I've been afraid to go ATI based on the driver horror stories. Not too many cheap boxes seem to come with nVidea cards any more - but I also hear good things about the intel video drivers.
Suggestions...?
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
Your matrox card will be outperformed by a factor of probably 5-10 by the integrated intel GPU these days.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
There has been no Nvidia "Linux graphics driver revolution" and Linux 3.7/3.8 Radeon performance is pretty much the same. Great to know!
I've run nvidia cards on linux since before the turn of the century but recently switched to an ATI for the eyefinity capability. Trying to do triple head (or more) with Nvidia just blows. I picked up a cheap Saphire Flex 6540 for less than $70 and it runs (3) 1920x1080 screens with one card and no real issues. I even get composite support for window previews. I know gaming is out, but that's fine for my purposes. For some more bucks I could run 6 screens off one card. I would prefer nvidia, but short of dropping thousands on a video card they just don't have any offerings that I've found. All in all I have to give ATI credit for putting something on the market at a reasonable price that is exactly what I needed, and something that no other vendors seem to care much about.
And probably 30-40 by something that's actually good.
OK, I admit it, I read TFA. Except for one or two games, I'm not seeing any performance improvement from those graphs. In fact, as the proud owner of a HD6570, the new DRM seems to be a regression. Since I don't game I don't really care anyway, but WTF is this story about again? Slow news Sunday?
The quadro FX5800 in my work PC has 4GB, the matrox has 32MB. I'd say 30-40 is a bit of a low ball (which is why the parent is marked funny.....)
Which will use two socket, will eat >200 watts and cost USD 1900? And later you will upgrade it to 10-core on same socket? :D
+100 USD and you will get 32 native cores and 64 threads on Opteron 6300.
"It feels like I'm at the Zoo when reading this thread - I'm frightened, but it's interesting" (c)
Heh. I was actually just trying to be conservative. I should have put "at least" in there I guess - i couldn't be bothered working it out exactly or looking up benchmarks. Either way. Worrying about AGP slots so you can use your old-as-dirt 3D card from 1999 when integrated 3d is many times faster and has later version OpenGL and DIrectX support is mildly retarded.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.