Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 42

Thread: Avivo Linux R500 Driver v0.1.0 Coming

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,116

    Default

    That's pretty impressive, Michael. I guess the advertising will be enough to pay the server's cost

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    176

    Default

    Tremendous work, I was expecting the Nouveau driver before the Avivo one, but perhaps the ATI one is the most urgently needed of course ;-).

    So much for bashing fglrx drivers, they are after all not that bad as much they are cursed for . Yes, it gives 50% performance of the hardware's capability, but it more or less works stable ;-). Aside, its not just Linux, ATI's performance in OSX is equally horrible . My sister has a iMac with a x1600, on which doom3 @640x480 gives about 50 fps in OSX, a little better in linux (55fps or so, and a little smoother too - it feels like fps is capped or something ;-) and 120 fps in windows xp. I wonder if iMac users with ati cards have ever bothered cribbing .

    Meanwhile, XGL does work fine and stable with fglrx (no 3d of course). Even on a modest radeon 200m, its pretty good. On another note, the image quality of fglrx drivers is pretty good too . Also, I am tempted to say that perhaps X-effects are broken on almost every graphics hardware . ATI - no need to mention. Intel - AIGLX is apparently fluid smooth on a 915/945+ say, but I get pretty nagging artifacts when I play video. (Or I might need some work arounds I guess). Smoothest and perfect on Nvidia cards, but people seem to have the turbocache blacking issues after long time. Atleast I must say 'it works' in case of Nvidia.

    PS : After seeing the gtkperf benchmark (never heard of it before , I installed it and was happy to see it giving 160 seconds on the geforce 7400 go in my notebook . Btw - were the tests performed in that same small default window or full screen ?

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    PL
    Posts
    908

    Default

    Aside, its not just Linux, ATI's performance in OSX is equally horrible . My sister has a iMac with a x1600, on which doom3 @640x480 gives about 50 fps in OSX, a little better in linux (55fps or so, and a little smoother too - it feels like fps is capped or something ;-)
    hmm could it be that these cards are designed primarily with directx in mind?

    just a random thought.

  4. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hdas View Post
    PS : After seeing the gtkperf benchmark (never heard of it before , I installed it and was happy to see it giving 160 seconds on the geforce 7400 go in my notebook . Btw - were the tests performed in that same small default window or full screen ?
    Default. The only change was setting the number of times to 1,000.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hdas View Post

    Meanwhile, XGL does work fine and stable with fglrx (no 3d of course). Even on a modest radeon 200m, its pretty good. On another note, the image quality of fglrx drivers is pretty good
    strange world you live in. If you don't mind random crashes and the accompanying loss of data.. and various other bugs.

    and Xgl is quite dead as codebase too iirc. Other than showing of beryl (and hoping) Xgl is no good.

    There really is no point in trying to see the glass as half full, we all know it's nearly empty.

    imho.

  6. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rolz View Post
    There really is no point in trying to see the glass as half full, we all know it's nearly empty.
    While the glass may not be full of water, there is a water truck on the away.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,116

    Default

    And when the truck arrives, it may has overhauled the competition.

    Okay that's enough. It sounds philosophic and I don't like that. What I mean is that GF8 has not the full performance on Linux at the moment, so AMD could beat nVidia. That would be funny cause people would laugh at you if you would tell them that your fglrx driver is faster then the nvidia driver.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    PL
    Posts
    908

    Default

    What I mean is that GF8 has not the full performance on Linux at the moment, so AMD could beat nVidia.
    i wonder who's primarily to blame for poor gfx performance on better cards - driver programmers, hw engineers, or perhaps linux kernel hackers?

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,116

    Default

    The guys that don't want more driver developers because they cost money.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    231

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yoshi314 View Post
    i wonder who's primarily to blame for poor gfx performance on better cards - driver programmers, hw engineers, or perhaps linux kernel hackers?
    My opinion on this is that DRI/DRM needed some work especially on memory management and once we got memory management properly working and cleverly used i am sure we will have a speed boost (ie at the moment all vertex are memcpy at least once when program render anythings and this is costly, with proper memory management we should not need anymore to memcpy this). There are other bottleneck like some GL stuff which are not handled well enough currently (enemy territory use some of this). Anyway there is work underway to address most of pitfall of current open source driver. What is hard is that we need to keep backward compatibility so we endup doing crazy things just to make sure we do not break old things (new drm should work with new Xserver, new Xserver should work with old drm, new dri driver should work with old drm, ...).

Posting Permissions

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