Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 49 of 49

Thread: AMD Fusion E-350 Linux Performance

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,645

    Default

    Well you can of course try Kanotix Hellfire, i even updated my fglrx script to work with 2.6.39rc1 kernel and i have got support scripts like mplayer vaapi which are tested with it. I sometimes test my scripts with U too, but not always. You may need to put some packages on hold if your distro is too new. But do not expect that h264 l5.1 will work.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,149

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mirv View Post
    If you have the motivation, look into distros other than Ubuntu. I know I probably just said something evil in these forums, but my own experience with Ubuntu on a HTPC wasn't good - you might find Arch or Gentoo (and the "fun" on playing with it) easier to fine tune to a HTPC system.
    Of course, I haven't had an AMD Fusion system to try this out on, so your mileage may vary.
    Arch / Gentoo + fglrx = a royal pain in the butt.

    No, just no. If you go for AMD+binary drivers, at least use a supported distro, such as Red Hat or Ubuntu. Or Kanotix (because Kano is trying to make damn sure the binary drivers install cleanly).

    If you go for open-source drivers, however, Arch or Gentoo suddenly become really beautiful.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    912

    Default

    Uh oh...here we go....
    why is fglrx a pain in Gentoo? I don't have any issues with it. Runs perfectly fine.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,149

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mirv View Post
    Uh oh...here we go....
    why is fglrx a pain in Gentoo? I don't have any issues with it. Runs perfectly fine.
    Because you have to delay Xorg and kernel updates until a compatible blob is released.

    It's funny. Half this forum bitches that AMD is slow to support new kernels, the other half bitches moans that they've never had such an issue.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    Because you have to delay Xorg and kernel updates until a compatible blob is released.

    It's funny. Half this forum bitches that AMD is slow to support new kernels, the other half bitches moans that they've never had such an issue.
    Sorry if I'm still not understanding....but I don't see that as a problem for Gentoo, or Arch, anymore than any other distro. Often Gentoo is a bit flexible (likely Arch too - don't know, I don't use it) and the ebuilds can apply patches to work with "unsupported" kernel versions.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    945

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mirv View Post
    likely Arch too - don't know, I don't use it
    Here you go... https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29111
    It's just the kernel module though. I'm with you on trying other distros other than Ubuntu.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,149

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mirv View Post
    Sorry if I'm still not understanding....but I don't see that as a problem for Gentoo, or Arch, anymore than any other distro. Often Gentoo is a bit flexible (likely Arch too - don't know, I don't use it) and the ebuilds can apply patches to work with "unsupported" kernel versions.
    What if such a patch doesn't exist? What if the incompatibility is in the X interface which cannot be patched? I've had to wait up to a month and a half for fglrx to catch up with Arch (if you upgrade, X gets broken). Hence the pain.

    Ubuntu doesn't suffer from this because it's an official fglrx target. The open-source drivers don't suffer from this because they are developed in lockstep with X and the kernel.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    What if such a patch doesn't exist? What if the incompatibility is in the X interface which cannot be patched? I've had to wait up to a month and a half for fglrx to catch up with Arch (if you upgrade, X gets broken). Hence the pain.

    Ubuntu doesn't suffer from this because it's an official fglrx target. The open-source drivers don't suffer from this because they are developed in lockstep with X and the kernel.
    That sounds like you're trying to upgrade all packages beyond fglrx supported versions. There's nothing to stop you staying with versions fglrx supports.

    Getting back on topic...I did try Ubuntu with a HTPC (atom + ion combo), and all the default Ubuntu stuff just bogged it down. I did try slim things down a bit, but in the end went to Gentoo (personal favourite, that's all) to start from slim and only put on what's needed for a HTPC (no gnome, kde, etc). Also, XBMC compiled from source is much zippier than the Ubuntu binaries, so even if someone's using Ubuntu, I heartily recommend compiling XBMC from source for a HTPC. As I mentioned, this was with an Atom, but I imagine things will be much the same story with a Fusion system.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    6

    Default Linux Performance vs another OS ??

    I thought this was meant to be showing Linux performance not APU performance ?

    is their any Comparison to show what FreeBSD / Linux / Windows would be ?

    I am wanting to get the Trinity / FM2 for my AIO box but unless I know FreeBSD will be able to make use of it I might just have to build another Intel Box

    ( using FreeBSD for its ZFS )

    but with Current ATI Driver support I am a little Concerned with how it will take on an APU !!

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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