Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: AMD Linux 2008 Year in Review

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    61

    Default

    Agree. There's a huuuge lack in good-working "must-haves"..

    1). 2D-accel(should be good with GTK, Qt3, Qt4, whatever)/Video/OpenGL(of declared version) --> it's the FIRST priority.

    2). Wine --> 2nd.

    3). Overdrive/Cross-Fire/what else?? --> these are the latest things to spend developer-hours on!!...

    :-/


    Still using Radeon.. No reason to change LESS-PERFORMANCE FOSS driver to STILL BUGGY IN THE MOST NEEDED AREAS proprietary one %)

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Die trolls, die!
    Posts
    525

    Default

    When I read the title I expected a summary of the things that have changed on the amd side on the linux platform. But this review is only about the closed source driver, so I'm kinda disappointed.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    565

    Default

    I took it that they were planning on talking about the progress of the open source driver in a different article, but we'll see.

    Regardless, yes, this was an article focusing on AMD only and their progress on Linux. That's a good thing, there's no denying that, but obviously if you want to actually recommend a card for consumers to buy, you should review a wide range of brands and cards. This wasn't that article. That article would be called AMD vs. Nvidia vs. Intel, or something. This article was AMD Linux 2008 Year in Review. AMD. AMD. So, if you want a good comparison, which most of those who browse this site would like to see, it hasn't happened in a while, so I agree:

    Phoronix, many of your readers I think would like to see an all out comparison of those three mentioned companies and their latest drivers on a good sampling of their cards and how they actually perform under the most common Linux tasks (common games, desktop performance, video playback).

    More more more, give us give us, whine whine whine. ^^

    No, but seriously, it was a good review on AMD though, just responding to some of the comments here. Funny/sad about the latest drivers not working with that Wine benchmark though...I'm sure there are several Wine games which can be benchmarked in both OGL and DX tho.

  4. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bugmenot View Post
    When I read the title I expected a summary of the things that have changed on the amd side on the linux platform. But this review is only about the closed source driver, so I'm kinda disappointed.
    Something on the open-source status is already written and is just waiting for a special date.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    565

    Default

    I know, to help with buying hardware, not that you need it, but you could have an upgrade-a-thon, and tell your readers to buy a specific system setup for benchmarking but getting different video cards, and then everyone can submit their scores, and it'll be a massive community bench marky...event...thing. :P

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yfrwlf View Post
    I know, to help with buying hardware, not that you need it, but you could have an upgrade-a-thon, and tell your readers to buy a specific system setup for benchmarking but getting different video cards, and then everyone can submit their scores, and it'll be a massive community bench marky...event...thing. :P
    I think it's possible without such a hassle, the only problem remaining (easy way to compare multiple setups with the web interface) will be solved when the next big version of Phoronix global arrives.

    You don't really need people to buy new hw - there will be enough gamers with similar CPU (Core 2, and if you're really a benchmark freak you can also ask people to downclock their processor), deactivate some RAM so everybody has 2Go (but realistically there's no need, games don't show differences over 2Go).

    I think the only difficulty is agreeing on standard resolutions, a set of tests and the games/gx bench.

    I'd suggest:
    - 1024x600 (so netbooks can do it)
    - 1440x900 (most gamers)
    - 1920x1200 (Full HD monitors, close to 1920x1080 for those playing on TV)

    And maybe 25XXxXXXX for those with a big monitor.

    Everybody could run the first two test, a relevant number could run the third. Just eliminate those that have a Core2 < 2Ghz or less than 2Go of RAM, and the rest just don't overclock or downclock.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,673

    Default

    I would say there are more 1680x1050 displays out now than 1440x900.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kano View Post
    I would say there are more 1680x1050 displays out now than 1440x900.
    I agree, but since gamers have been choosing 19' for years since that was the uper resolutions were considered to taxing, I though most gamers were still using that. 1680x1050 might also be too big a gap coming from netbook resolution. I wouldn't mind running tests in 4 resolutions instead of 3 though.

    All aside, my 7900GS is still ok in 1920x1200 for all Linux games (except maybe the ET:QW demo), so I'm still not sure we really need benchmarks. What would be really informative is a table with supported features and - possible, but far more complex - list of games playable through Wine with each brand. For benchs, I'd expect anything starting from the HD46XX/9600GT to run everything up to FullHD with no hiccups.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    7

    Default

    I'd like to own some AMD cards, but the primary use of my home computer is Wine and World of Warcraft. From what I've read, using an AMD card with that software combination is simply an exercise in frustration. Unless thats changed with 8.12... (I somehow doubt it has, tho)

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    San Bernardino, CA
    Posts
    234

    Default

    When my GeForce 8500GT died, I bought a Radeon 4670 based upon reviews on Anandtech. Boy, was I dissapointed at the quality of fglrx. Things have improved slightly with Catalyst 8.12; however, the number one complaint is that I cannot play videos w/o flickering when running Compiz. I have to disable Compiz to get smooth video playback! C'mon, Nvidia has this problem solved in their driver, why can't ATI do it? Do we really have to wait for DRI2 for a fix?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •