Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 64

Thread: AMD Admits It Has Linux Problems

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    People who transcode will burn in hell.
    Encoding should only be done from a lossless source, never from a lossy source.
    I like it hot. The Point is that no hardware decoder can handle High@L5. In the Most cases you has only 720p and 1080p with bitrates that L3.1/L4.0 can handle without an difference.
    And the next on my wish list is are the 10bit profiles.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    People who transcode will burn in hell.
    Encoding should only be done from a lossless source, never from a lossy source.
    JPEG upscaling should be illegal in USA!

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    "AMD Admits It Has Linux Problems "

    Trololololol first time i read this i imagine a world amd Admits his real Linux problems?

    and then i read the article and i read about openCL and Catalyst LOL...

    are Bitcoins so popular this days? because you don't need openCL so much exept for "bitcoins"

    the REAL Problems for AMD are: the "Catalyst" dropping the catalyst on linux and a pure opensource solution would be the gold way to fix this problem.

    after that the OpenCL problem is also solved because a Linux Distribution always deliver the right "opensource" files

    AMD also need to release some better specs for there power-managment

    and in the end AMD need to drop DRM and Copyprotection features like "UVD"

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    REAL Problems for AMD are: the "Catalyst" dropping the catalyst on linux and a pure opensource solution would be the gold way to fix this problem.
    As an FGLRX user I like this idea. Sadly, I doubt it would be possible to transfer/shift developers from FGLRX/Catalyst to Radeon (open source) due to restrictions.

    I'm soon going to be getting a cheap-ish NVIDIA card if the AMD situation doesn't improve. Quite fond of their open source work, but the blob is just horrible (I need something more powerful than the open source driver, sadly). I'd much rather see all of the work go into the open source driver whilst leaving FGLRX for dead, but I doubt that'd be possible due to the reason I mentioned above.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Adarion View Post
    OpenCL? Omg, always this OpenCL. It's a nice thing to have but there are more important things right now like proper video acceleration and power management on par with fglrx for all chips as well as recent chip support. Okay, they're talking about fglrx but this beast needs support for recent kernel x.org in time, better 2d and better compatibility (e.g. WM compositors)
    Agree.
    Who gives a shit about OpenGL, just make video acceleration and porno work!
    Well, its a executive problem. And its far to easy to understand. You see, a GPU is faster than a CPU, but is limited by its VRAM. A APU bypasses the memory limitation, and its GPU part is faster than a normal CPU. So basically if they get OpenCL working properly, whenever somebody wants to build a render farm they will get a gigantic amount of APUs due insane processing power. But thats not the reason. The reason is a lot simpler: If they have OpenCL, and somebody wants to hit the worlds #1 super computer dream as usual, AMD can ship their APUs to do that. Which also will net them a lot of cash and field testing and a long term contract. Workstation GPUs are also in the same area, special deals at special prices for massive profit.
    Another reason why OpenCL is important is also due the hype of GPU computing. Basically for every application that gets written for CUDA, AMD loses money on a long time scale. For us normal users its irrelevant.

    The irony is that is that just like how FLOSS and OSS is superior to various binary blobs, a FLOSS amd driver could have provided the same, and with potential costumization for the high end computer buyer. The only trouble is "perceived patent problems" from a lawyers point of view, and that it will still take close to half a year to get the driver up to speed with a large and proper team. Its basically a shot towards their own leg, especially as they can't even mantain a proper OpenCL driver for the Windows platform even. Just getting a functionable FLOSS driver would save them a lot of problems, at the cost of a problem thats irrelevant due barrier of marked entry. New entries stealing stuff? Too expensive to even enter the marked. Competitors already got their own solutions.
    The advantage would more than pay off, especially due free driver architecture due the way Gallium is structured. The only problem is that they would be contributing to a collective driver, and as greed dicators: Jews hoards jewgold.


    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    I would like they to more quickly come out with a new release to support the new ABI of X.org whenever there is a new X.org release.

    It usually take them week or months.
    Nvidia does this much faster.
    The isssue is not even that bad. Its just that the most bleeding edge AMD supports is whatever the latest Ubuntu is. Which is annoying for us who wants to have something a bit newer.

    Quote Originally Posted by blackiwid View Post
    If I want somewhat stable gaming-fast linux graphics card I naturaly go for Nvidia, the only point in buying a AMD card for linux is because of the opensource driver..
    Enjoy no randr support bro. Its not a problem if you are just using one monitor, but I have heard the horror stories.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,383

    Default

    One more time... "getting rid of the fglrx driver" doesn't provide enough resources to do the same with the radeon driver.

    The whole raison d'etre for a proprietary driver is to allow the sharing of code and developer effort across the entire PC market (ie across multiple OSes). The fglrx driver has good 3D performance because it shares most of the OpenGL stack (and the associated development funding) with other OSes and therefore has access to a much larger dev team. The development work would still need to happen for the other OSes even if fglrx wasn't benefitting from it.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by del_diablo View Post
    Enjoy no randr support bro.
    Where you been, bro? Nvidia 302.11 beta driver has xrandr support.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    One more time... "getting rid of the fglrx driver" doesn't provide enough resources to do the same with the radeon driver.

    The whole raison d'etre for a proprietary driver is to allow the sharing of code and developer effort across the entire PC market (ie across multiple OSes). The fglrx driver has good 3D performance because it shares most of the OpenGL stack (and the associated development funding) with other OSes and therefore has access to a much larger dev team. The development work would still need to happen for the other OSes even if fglrx wasn't benefitting from it.
    Indeed- that's pretty much my understanding on the situation. It's just such a shame that I have to sacrifice a proper desktop experience in order to have acceptable 3d for gaming, etc.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Newfie View Post
    Indeed- that's pretty much my understanding on the situation. It's just such a shame that I have to sacrifice a proper desktop experience in order to have acceptable 3d for gaming, etc.
    Don't think you will in time... big problem here is that non-developers set unrealistically high expectations (basically claiming that the open source drivers would almost immediately outperform the proprietary drivers) and now that original delusion has been replaced with an equally wrong "open source drivers are going to be slow forever" delusion.

    In practice there has been steady progress over the last few years (look at r5xx as an example) and all indications are that performance will continue to improve on the newer GPUs.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgman View Post
    Don't think you will in time... big problem here is that non-developers set unrealistically high expectations (basically claiming that the open source drivers would almost immediately outperform the proprietary drivers) and now that original delusion has been replaced with an equally wrong "open source drivers are going to be slow forever" delusion.

    In practice there has been steady progress over the last few years (look at r5xx as an example) and all indications are that performance will continue to improve on the newer GPUs.
    Oh, I completely understand that and I am very happy with the overall progress with the open source drivers. The problem for me is not the open source stuff, but rather the poor quality of FGLRX in terms of tearing, slow scrolling, input delays , etc. I already recommend AMD cards to non-gamer Linux users.

    Apart from 3d performance the open source driver does almost everything I'd ever need it for. It's just not good enough for my needs in that area. Apparently power management is rather lacking on the high-end, too, but I cannot comment on that as I just have a low end Caicos.

    I've only been using an AMD card on my main machine for about a year, and it has not been a positive experience. It's just the horrible desktop performance. 3D works great, but the tearing and 2d lag drives me insane. The open source driver is *almost* usable for me, but still not quite there yet.

Posting Permissions

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