R8xx is still R6xx architecture. There will be new R8xx based cards from the end of 2009 until mid-2010 or so. So if AMD is going to drop R6xx+ support, it won't happen until early 2011 at the very earliest.
Originally Posted by Kano
Also, fglrx in general is in a pretty good shape right know. Wine is working better with every release, crashes are getting rare and Composite is becoming usable.
I'd like to build a cheap 2nd system as well as upgrade my current system's video card. I was looking into a cheap AMD build and many of these have the integrated graphics IGP(?). Anyway, I couldn't find any info on the boards that have integrated HD Radeon 2100. Nothing, nada... very little Linux info on it and I had to rely on forum posts wherever they may be.
That is unacceptable, imho. I might eventually go for a more upscale board that has integrated HD Radeon 3200 or 3300 (reviewed here on Phoronix, I believe) so that would be more convenient (I believe the fglrx drivers/Catalyst is used) but still...
Back to graphics cards: I would go with ATI but it sounds like a lot of work and added concerns. It works BUT there is this condition and that condition... can't use compiz, okay, I don't need that but sounds like other restrictions, too.
At least, I am familiar with installing Nvidia drivers even though the process can be a bit inconvenient if trying for the most updated driver and worrying about upgrades. But, there's plenty of write-ups on it and I can usually find assistance.
With an ATI card, it's like starting all over and I am not sure how *well* things work. There is 'X works' but that doesn't explain or express how or to what extent. Interesting, though. I'd like to learn of more customer experiences with ATI cards with Linux before I'd take a chance on it.
Most motherboard designs went straight from the rs690 (X1250) to the rs780 family of chipsets (HD3xxx); there are 740G-based motherboards out there but not a lot. The 740G is an updated version of the 690G, while the 780 family is an all new design with a graphics core midway between HD2400 and HD3450.
The chipset is called 740G; you'll probably have a lot more success searching for that than for radeon 2100.
There is some discussion of 740G on Phoronix as well : http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9431
That said, I would still strongly recommend you go for a 780. The price difference is pretty small and you get a 3D engine that is a couple of generations more current.
Last edited by bridgman; 07-07-2009 at 12:17 AM.
So, 780G or 780GX? I guess I could move up to such boards. That's good to know, thanks. I would probably use the integrated graphics at first, so I believe it would be HD Radeon 3200 or 3300 depending on the board?
Originally Posted by bridgman
I assume these boards also have a PCI-E x16 slot for video cards that I could go with if later on, I decide to? Does it have to be ATI? I read someplace that Nvidia cards 'choke' in AMD/ATI boards. IS that accurate?
Anyway, I have read up on 780G/GX chipset motherboards and it sounds good to me. Decent prices and option of the integrated graphics. I just need to decide whether it's worth it to go for one that supports DDR3 RAM.
AFAIK the 780G graphics is referred to as "3200" while 790GX graphics is referred to as "3300". The cores are similar, but the 790GX runs at higher clock speeds the graphics performance is higher.
Note that the 790FX is a completely different chip without graphics.
All of the 780/790 mobos I have seen include an x16 PCIE slot with all 16 lanes hooked up but I believe the chipset can also be configured with just x8 wiring to the x16 slot and more PCIE lanes for other connectors, so double-check the specific motherboard to be sure.
The RAM connects to the CPU not the chipset, so AFAIK it's really a matter of getting a mobo with an AM3 socket and a CPU with DDR3 support if you want to run DDR3.
This is my expirence with ATI/AMD. I try to tell this as neutral as posible (as a no ATI fan).
I have always had nvidia, since I bought this laptop (HD3650 mobility). I bought it in 2008, and at that time there were alot of problems with fglrx. I had problems with wine and compiz, but the installation weren't any problems.
Now in 2009 with 9.6 I am fairly impressed by the progress fglrx has gone through. No it isn't perfect yet, but a whole lot better than in the early 2008. Today I don't think about driver problems anymore, when I use my computer. I can even run a lot of wine apps now, which were impossible for just 2/3 month ago.
Here is my problems left:
- XV under compositing with fgrlrx = Not good. Tearing and slow video playback. With composite turned off, its fairly good. I have heard opengl is without tearing, but not as good quality.
- Maximizing / resizing under compositing is slow out of the box. It is easy solved installing a patched version of Xorg. I don't know if this is fglrx's fault.
- Still wine is able to crash, but I don't know if its fglrx or wine's fault. It seems 3D related, so it might be fglrx.
- 2D is alittle slower with compositing, than without. But that difference is almost gone in the newer versions. Without compositing, 2D is as fast as in windows.
I really don't have others problems with fglrx. But I want to move to the oss drivers soon, because last time i tried it 2D was very fast and xv video worked perfect without tearing.
Last edited by tball; 07-07-2009 at 05:25 PM.
I was curious about benchmarks. In Windows, there is a number of sites that compare via GAMES benchmarks and such.
But, for Linux, not so many. This site has done some reviews on cards and presented benchmarks but I was wondering about the current situation.
How do they compare? For e.g., HD Radeon 4870 or 4890 v.s. GeForce 260 GTX?
Those cards are neck and neck depending on the game but in Linux, is there any disparity due to the ATI factor? I don't even care if Nvidia in Linux is a bit lower in benchmarks compared to Windoze but I was wondering about how the cards compare to ATI's. Is the review done here still apply or is there an update based on the situation of Catalyst?
Fglrx 3D performance is basically on par with the Windows driver. Of course, I'm talking only about cross-platform titles and not games running with Wine.
The OpenGL stack is pretty much the same in the Linux and Windows XP drivers. 2D and video code is significantly different between the Linux and Windows drivers, however, since the acceleration APIs have very little in common.
There aren't a lot of benchmarks comparing different vendors' products under Linux but here's one :
Last edited by bridgman; 07-08-2009 at 01:11 AM.
Does it matter which mobo you use with either of these cards?
Is there any issues with using a Nvidia card in one of the AMD AM2+ or AM3 motherboards?
I would probably use the ATI or Nvidia card (ones we're comparing, that generation, anyway) in my P35 mobo but I wanted to buy/build a 2nd system. I am debating whether to build a used P45 system (not a lot of upgrade options but still decent) or a newer AM2+ or AM3 system. The potential issue or factor would be that I have a Nvidia 7950GT in the P35 system I have. I could use this in the 2nd system as it probably doesn't have much re-sale value. However, if I buy an AMD AM2+ / AM3 system, I am not sure whether Nvidia cards can be used without problems. I know many have ATI integrated IGP graphics but I still would like to know about discrete grahpics cards options.
I suppose I could sell the GeForce 79xx series card for real cheap or find a friend/relative who wants/needs a simple discrete card but I was looking for all my options if I buy a 2nd system.
I also was curious about using one brand's card in the other (chipset) mobo. I know Intel has CrossFire but to my knowledge, it doesn't matter whether the discrete graphics card is ATI or Nvidia as it only matters if you are using two cards.
TIA for any info!