Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33

Thread: Current state of Catalyst drivers?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    776

    Default

    Triple-Monitor-Setups work with both fglrx and the open drivers.

    Back when I used fglrx I found it to work reasonably well for my purposes, but you MUST resist the urge to configure your multiscreen layout via aticonfig, because that gets you a broken Zaphod/Xinerama setup. Configure a single monitor layout and use xrandr to configure additional monitors. Better don't touch AMDCCCLE at all, since IIRC that'll lead to zaphod, too.
    Limitations were slow 2D (though that was before their new 2d acceleration, so I don't know the current state) and trouble with wine games.

    I've now switched to the OSS drivers on both my desktop and my new notebook and I'm happy with them. Running advanced 3D games (native or wine) is a hit-and-miss, but the desktop experience is great (better than using fglrx OR nvidia). 3d compositing works, and so do simple 3d apps, games or emulators.


    Waiting for ivy bridge isn't going to help much, since intel's drivers aren't suited for highend 3D either. Whether you pick an intel GPU or an AMD GPU with the OSS drivers won't make much difference; except that the AMD GPU carries more horsepower and is available right now.


    nvidia has the most advanced openGL implementation on linux right now, but (last time I checked) a triple-setup using nvidia hardware requires a multi-GPU-system, which comes with it's own set of quirks and problems. Their 2D didn't feel quite as snappy as AMD/radeon, either (if that's even comparable across different hardware). And multiscreen setups are painful, since they still don't fully support xrandr, so have fun digging in their manuals and your xorg.conf until everything's set up.
    Last edited by rohcQaH; 10-28-2011 at 10:12 AM.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Panix View Post
    Obviously, nvidia and intel invest more.
    you are naive if you think so.
    be sure amd invest more "money" in Linux driver support.

    but sure nvidia do not split there money in a opensource driver.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,283

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    you are naive if you think so.
    be sure amd invest more "money" in Linux driver support.
    Prove it. Or are you just talking out your @$$ again? (Note: that was a rhetorical question because you're constantly spouting bull$hit).

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanL View Post
    Prove it. Or are you just talking out your @$$ again? (Note: that was a rhetorical question because you're constantly spouting bull$hit).
    "Prove it" LOL if i Prove it Nvidia and AMD sue me and the GOV will put me into Jail. You are naive if you think anybody can prove this.

    but yes open your eyes its more expensive to support open+closed source drivers instead of only the closed one.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    997

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    "Prove it" LOL if i Prove it Nvidia and AMD sue me and the GOV will put me into Jail. You are naive if you think anybody can prove this.

    but yes open your eyes its more expensive to support open+closed source drivers instead of only the closed one.
    Considering the reports of 'crappy AMD/ATI binary blob release sucks again' posts and the same sort of discussion in other linux distro forums seems to indicate either waste of funds or incompetence or indifference or maybe all three, if AMD spends more on Linux! It's been the same story in consecutive years!

    OSS drivers is good in terms of ideals and values but there are still limitations and only basic functionality for newer cards, anyway. If people care about power management, I think it's still lagging behind in support. At least, that's last I read or my impression.

    I think if I got an AMD/ATI card, it would be used and relatively cheap. I am not confident in the support.

    Also, the fact they don't support BSD and can't get more support with WINE developers seems to indicate something at least.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Derpinator View Post
    What is the current state of the binary blob on linux?
    Better than the usual trolls make it sound.

    Quote Originally Posted by Derpinator View Post
    I'm thinking of doing a 3x24" Eyefinity setup in the following months and my questions are: Is it stable? Tear-free? Bug-free?
    Yes if you follow instructions, yes if you enable the aptly name "Without tearing" function, and what kind of software is certified 100% bug-free?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,030

    Default

    I have no experience with Eyefinity but I do have some experience with the binary blob, and it is not nearly as bad as some would have made out. My greatest complaints are that it suffers from the innate problems that all blobs suffer from, namely the inconvenience of having to maintain it separately from your system packages and the fact that it is proprietary. The tearing bogey at least in my experience is overstated; my machine did have some desktop tearing, though only desktop tearing as video playback and games were not affected. The other three setups I have tried with varying cards had no such issues. The anti-tearing feature had no effect on my desktop though, but turning on Compiz did, though I would rather live with the tearing. Using a version of the Nvida blob with SuperGamer and my internal graphics also resulted in some tearing. Curiously enough, I had no tearing with Catalyst and SuperGamer.

    The fact that when you killed the X server with CRTL-ALT-BACKSPACE you could no longer play 3D games again until a restart was also a little annoying on Catalyst, but hardly crippling. All of my desktop Catalyst experiences are with Fedora 14.

    On my current setup I just use the R600 classic Mesa drivers with my Radeon HD 4670 with Fedora 13 and dual head configured in Zaphod mode. Power management is adequate for me (getting temperatures in the 40 degrees in Catalyst on SuperGamer and 50 degrees in R600g from Fedora 15 Live CD as 13 can not probe temperature) and it almost fully supports my gaming, which I engage in frequently. Once Fedora 16 is released I will install that on my 2 TB drive and use the R600 Gallium 3D drivers, which should support all of my gaming requirements. In general, the free drivers are easier to maintain for me and offer a much better desktop experience.

    I am sorry if this information is not very helpful for you Derpinator, but it was more directed as a response to some of the others in the thread.
    Last edited by Hamish Wilson; 10-28-2011 at 06:11 PM. Reason: small typo

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
    I am sorry if this information is not very helpful for you Derpinator, but it was more directed as a response to some of the others in the thread.
    It was very helpful, thank you.

    I guess I'll have to buy the damn card and see how it goes!

    Regarding stability, my X server has crashed only once in the last 2 years of using Nvidia's binary driver. There are no leaks either, my workstation has been up for 4 months and everything is looking good. This is the kind of stability I'll want with my future eyefinity setup.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    12

    Default Fedora 15 + fglrx

    All I can say is that my experience with the AMD driver hasn't been horrible. My biggest compliant is the bad 2D acceleration and the fact that things start slowing down when you are running multiple GPU accelerated applications.

    I'm running two 5770s in Crossfire on two monitors.

    Besides what the others have mentioned on the pros/cons, I don't have much to add.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Panix View Post
    Considering the reports of 'crappy AMD/ATI binary blob release sucks again' posts and the same sort of discussion in other linux distro forums seems to indicate either waste of funds or incompetence or indifference or maybe all three, if AMD spends more on Linux! It's been the same story in consecutive years!
    i do have trouble with the catalyst to but this time not on work only on removing the driver. thats a big different.

    in the past you do have the trouble on working with the driver. now they spend even more money and yes you can life with that cloused source driver.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panix View Post
    OSS drivers is good in terms of ideals and values but there are still limitations and only basic functionality for newer cards, anyway. If people care about power management, I think it's still lagging behind in support. At least, that's last I read or my impression.
    they work on it to improve the driver in the future.
    for example the r300-r500 is feature complete and there is a good chance for the r600 to be in the same status in the future.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panix View Post
    I think if I got an AMD/ATI card, it would be used and relatively cheap. I am not confident in the support.
    amd cards are always cheaper than nvidia cards.
    maybe you think you buy it cheap in the reality amd just sell it cheap.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panix View Post
    Also, the fact they don't support BSD and
    in fact they support the BSD people because the BSD people can use the linux opensource driver as a reverence opensource driver.

    this means they can write there own opensource driver based on this informations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panix View Post
    can't get more support with WINE developers seems to indicate something at least.
    i report many amd wine bugs and "crossover" fix it because why? because amd pay for it. they fix bugs in arma2 although it is usually not supportet.
    AMD also pay for bugfixing oblivion graphik bugs in wine.
    in fact! amd support wine.

Posting Permissions

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