Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 89

Thread: AMD 8.36.5 Driver -- The Still no fglrx AIGLX Support Edition

  1. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yoshi314 View Post
    do they work with xorg-server-1.3.0 ? i don't want to compile it in vain :]
    No xorg-server 1.3 support

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    PL
    Posts
    908

    Default

    ati linux team - world's worst job :P

    seriously, i am now strongly considering sticking with my old crappy x300se on open drivers, until the open r500 driver pops up.

  3. #33

    Default

    The mouse pointer alignment issue with dual monitors running different resolutions finally got fixed, after driving insane for the past six months. Now if they could fix the composite issue I'll be happy with the fglrx drivers for the first time ever.
    Last edited by shinytoaster; 04-23-2007 at 12:40 AM.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Bulgaria
    Posts
    269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shinytoaster View Post
    The mouse pointer alignment issue with dual monitors running different resolutions finally got fixed, after driving insane for the past six months. Now if they could fix the composite issue I'll be happy with the fglrx drivers for the first time ever.
    Are we talking about the thing where the pointer rather becomes a square with transparent stripes? Coz I still've got that.

  5. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sundown View Post
    Are we talking about the thing where the pointer rather becomes a square with transparent stripes? Coz I still've got that.
    No this is where the mouse pointer visually isn't actually where the pointer is, so you do not know where you're clicking. Only happened on dual monitor setups of different res.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    Using the Rialto bridge, ATI can offer some native PCI-E GPUs with an external AGP interface. So that they could sell like a Radeon X1600 as an AGP card without using a different GPU than the PCI-E X1600. Essentially just a PCI-E -> AGP converter.
    Ahh. Thanks; I didn't know that technology was available commercially yet. Keeping up with what you can do is difficult enough; once you add "what's on the market" to that, s/difficult/damn-near-impossible/.

    The only thing I don't get is, if the AGP bus is - and was - the limiting factor, then what's the advantage of this setup to the end-user? Or is it more a way for vendors to get 2x the product out of a given GPU / chipset / etc. - and possibly a way to use chips that can't pass QI for PCI-e but might work just fine on an AGP card that's lower-end than the PCI-e card they were originally made for?

    Or was PCI-e really just never really the be-all and end-all for the bulk of us...

    Thanks,
    Larry

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    DG, IL, USA
    Posts
    195

    Default

    I'd imagine using the adapter is a cost saving measure that way they don't have to produce 2 versions of the same card. I haven't seen any benches involving the adapter so I don't know it there is any performance penalty for using one. I've been thinking about trying it when I buy my next vid card so when I do move to PCI-E I can just keep using the same card.

    PCI-e is definitely a faster way to transport the data but last time I checked no games were coming anywhere close to saturating the 8x agp bus. IMO, I don't think there's a huge advantage unless you want to run sli/crossfire or do a large amount of gaming with todays most demanding games.
    Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety,deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
    Ben Franklin 1755

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by time2IPL View Post
    The only thing I don't get is, if the AGP bus is - and was - the limiting factor, then what's the advantage of this setup to the end-user? Or is it more a way for vendors to get 2x the product out of a given GPU / chipset / etc. - and possibly a way to use chips that can't pass QI for PCI-e but might work just fine on an AGP card that's lower-end than the PCI-e card they were originally made for?
    There's not really an advantage to the end-user. It's more of an advantage to the marketing and sales people. It's more of a way to eke out 2X for the chip- as you surmised.

    Or was PCI-e really just never really the be-all and end-all for the bulk of us...
    It's been slightly overhyped. It's an opportunity to have all the disparate buses (AGP, PCI-X, PCI, etc...) all unified into a new cleaner spec that handles basic (PCI-E 1x- handles most PCI device situations) and high-end (PCI-E 16x- handles GPUs, ultra-fast channel adapter devices...) with the same basic bus, just more lanes to speed up things with. It's something to allow the chip and device (which includes mobos...) vendors a way to clean their house and have a consistent way to do things instead of conflicting and confusing ways. It allows me to do things like build supercomputer clusters with Infiniband or iWARP devices without needing server motherboards (PCI-X 66/100/133 would be your only OTHER option for the devices...) and so forth.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Up North, Where 10 degrees is shorts weather
    Posts
    80

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hobbes View Post
    I already test it:


    Sapphire X1650 pro AGP 512MB

    openSUSE 10.2 x86-64

    Kernel 2.6.20.6

    I noticed better performance moving and resizing windows.


    I use openGL to playback videos on mplayer and xine and so far i have not noticed any problems, working as 8.35.5 did.
    .
    Hobbes!
    my friend, my long lost hero

    I recently decided that an upgrade was in order -- I've one of these critters -- although mines an official ATI card.
    ati X1650 Pro - AGP ( chipid is 71C1 )

    I've been beating my brains out getting this beast to work on an amd64 system. I've gotten it to work without DRI and and truth told, Im impressed on teh improvement over the 9600 just with the way it now renders fonts on my desktop -- lcd screen -- however - I enable dri and it stops dead at dri installation complete....

    could you (most kindly) let me know what kernel options (i.e agp/agpgart etc) and what config you have in the device section for fglrx on your system... PLEASE -- before I convice myself I've misspent $200!

    Most humbly in your debt!

  10. #40

    Default

    I've really lost track of these AMD drivers. Michael, does it fix, 'on paper' fix my problem with AGP? I'm not bothering to download otherwise.

Posting Permissions

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