AMD Catalyst: Ubuntu 12.10 vs. Windows 7

[Tiger_Coder]

For my pc with AMD Integrated 4250 graphics chip, OSS readon driver is disastrous for Kubuntu 12.04. Default OSS driver as well as when updated to mesa9 using PPA don't show anything on my monitor when booting(No Signal). Also if my PC goes to sleep it can't find the monitor anymore before restart. Its impossible to use it with this bugs. Also not to mention extreme slow performance on my already slow IGP and graphics corruption with readon(benchmarks below) . FGLRX has also many annoyance but they are just annoy, not make unproductive like readon. So I have to use blob.

I know blobs are not freedom but we are not in the perfect world where all we use are free. In practical world, for productivity blob are best.

Although the recent drop of support for pre 5000 series chipset just screwed me. I can't update to Ubuntu 12.10 in the fear of legacy 12.6 fglrx won't support it. And as I am a computer engineering student and fond of newer technology, sticking with 12.04 really pains me. I am a student in 3rd world and I don't have the luxury to change graphics chipset so quickly. I bough mine just 1.5 years ago. But even if I buy a new card, I will continue using blob but that won't be AMD's crap. I will bye Nvidia(They still support my old PC's 6200 AGP with 304.xx)


Some of my benchmark of readon vs different fglrx

[efikkan]

Catalyst is improving, but still not there to compete with Nvidia. (It still vastly outperforms the "open source" drivers)

These test results clearly show that Intel is the future for Linux GPU-tasks.
It might sound a bit unreflected to state this directly, but the current performance-backlog of integrated Intel Graphics will be recovered in the future and companies like Nvidia and ATI, who still offer currently slightly faster binary-blobs, overtaken.
Now, the reason for that is the property of Open Source- and especially Kernel-development, that companies and individuals have a hard time to maintain and nurture their "commits", when they are not directly implemented into the actual infrastructure and source code of an OSS-project.
Just imagine the huge manpower required to make sure that the Nvidia and ATI Kernel-modules actually work with the most recent versions of the Kernel. Some of us, including myself, have already experienced how much of a pain it causes to find out, that the proprietary Nvidia-driver doesn't work with the current Kernel version installed. To be fair, these issues lessened over the last few years, and Nvidia has a great way of dealing with that.
I am not that much of a Gentoo-enthusiast to state that binary-blobs might have a speed disadvantage in comparison to natively-compiled open source alternatives.
Keeping at the back of your minds, that in case of binary-blobs, the companies' support is endemic for them to work with a dynamically changing project like the Linux Kernel, one might ask what would happen if this support was seized one day.
In case of open drivers, the case is rather clear. Contrary to that, it would just be a question of time when the actual Nvidia-modules stopped working with the ongoingly changing Kernel.
Moreover, Linux is not a system one might install for gaming. Windows is great for that, out of question.

When it comes to choosing between Intel or ATI/Nvidia on your next hardware-purchase, you have to conclude, in which way you want to affect the future of Linux graphics. Binary-blobs work fine, they are faster, they are technically more advanced, even I am using one currently. But in the Linux-world, we also have to look at the ethical properties of this discussion: Which solution is more suitable for a "free" future we all struggle for by using GNU/Linux?

For ease of use, Ubuntu has PPAs with prepared drivers, and will soon have official support new drivers. Other distributions is a different case.

But regarding the ethical question, you have to keep in mind that Mr. Stallman is using his own definition of "freedom", and there are several aspects and degrees of freedom. For instance the GPL license provides you a lot of freedom, but still applies some restrictions with interlinking licenses. The open source Radeon drivers provide access to more of the source code than Nvidias proprietary ones, but still has a tiny proprietary firmware module. So there is clearly degrees of freedom, and keep in mind that Nvidia's driver provide an open source installer and control panel, as well as the CUDA compiler. The driver uses open standards such as OpenGL and OpenCL, so it's not locking us into proprietary "evil" technologies. In addition it provides you the freedom to utilize the maximum performance and features from your hardware, with excellent video playback, the best OpenGL and OpenCL support, good performance scaling, advanced AA, and so on. The world is not so black and white as some people portray it, there are always trade offs.

From my experience working daily with OpenGL, the Intel drivers perform decently with basic OpenGL with simple or no GLSL shading, and for some users that is sufficient. The GLSL support for Intel(under Linux) is still quite unstable, but when a stable state is reached the Intel hardware will still not stand a chance against even the mid range hardware from Nvidia or AMD. Intel scales badly with heavy shader loads on modern OpenGL 3.x+, the hardware is simply not powerful enough for this usage. On the flip side, since the hardware seems to be designed for lighter graphics load, good power efficiency can be achieved. My greatest wish for the Intel hardware is a dedicated GDDR5 chip to achieve better memory latency and performance.

[Rigaldo]

For my pc with AMD Integrated 4250 graphics chip, OSS readon driver is disastrous for Kubuntu 12.04. Default OSS driver as well as when updated to mesa9 using PPA don't show anything on my monitor when booting(No Signal). Also if my PC goes to sleep it can't find the monitor anymore before restart. Its impossible to use it with this bugs. Also not to mention extreme slow performance on my already slow IGP and graphics corruption with readon(benchmarks below) . FGLRX has also many annoyance but they are just annoy, not make unproductive like readon. So I have to use blob.

I know blobs are not freedom but we are not in the perfect world where all we use are free. In practical world, for productivity blob are best.

Although the recent drop of support for pre 5000 series chipset just screwed me. I can't update to Ubuntu 12.10 in the fear of legacy 12.6 fglrx won't support it. And as I am a computer engineering student and fond of newer technology, sticking with 12.04 really pains me. I am a student in 3rd world and I don't have the luxury to change graphics chipset so quickly. I bough mine just 1.5 years ago. But even if I buy a new card, I will continue using blob but that won't be AMD's crap. I will bye Nvidia(They still support my old PC's 6200 AGP with 304.xx)


Some of my benchmark of readon vs different fglrx

Yeah, just build a Gentoo/Linux from scratch with all new updates and x.org 1.12 ..
Seriously though, I understand. My brother can't update his Ubuntu for similar reasons too..
That's an issue. It would be cool if we didn't need new drivers every time x.org updated too. I don't have enough knowledge to know why, so won't say if good or bad ..

[kwahoo]

This week Croteam released big update for Serious Sam 3: BFE (the game will be released on Linux soon) - Windows users can use OpenGL renderer now. Very quick comparison (winxp, Catalyst 12.9 beta, fps counter in the right corner):
Direct3D

00:12:47 INF:   Gfx API: Direct3D
00:12:47 INF:   Resolution: 1920 x 1080
00:12:47 INF:   Vendor: ATI (0x1002)
00:12:47 INF:   Driver: ati2dvag.dll (0x6758)
00:12:47 INF:   Renderer: AMD Radeon HD 6670
00:12:47 INF:   Version: 6.14.10.7279
00:12:47 INF:   Video memory size: 1024 MB
00:12:47 INF:   Available for textures: 1116 MB
00:12:47 INF:   Active GPU(s): 1
00:12:47 LOG:   Processing file Content/SeriousSam3/Config/CheckDriver.lua
00:12:47 INF:   Driver version: 7279 (required: 7213)
00:12:47 LOG:   Loaded "D:\Steam\steamapps\common\Serious Sam 3\Bin\SfxXAD.dll".
00:12:47 LOG:   Loaded "X3DAudio1_7.dll".

00:12:51 INF:   AutoDetect: storing new settings: gfx_iPixelProgramVersion=40,gfx_ctConcurrentGPUs=1,sys_iGPUVendorID=4098,sys_iCPUFamily=15,sys_iCPUMHz=2793,sys_iGPUDeviceID=26456,sys_strCPUVendor=AuthenticAMD,gfx_ulVideoMemoryMB=1024,

OpenGL

00:19:47 INF:   Gfx API: OpenGL
00:19:47 INF:   Resolution: 1920 x 1080
00:19:47 INF:   Vendor: ATI (0x1002)
00:19:47 INF:   Driver: ATI Technologies Inc. (0x6758)
00:19:47 INF:   Renderer: AMD Radeon HD 6670
00:19:47 INF:   Version: 4.2.11903 Compatibility Profile Context
00:19:47 INF:   Video memory size: 1024 MB
00:19:47 INF:   Available for textures: 116 MB
00:19:47 INF:   Active GPU(s): 1
00:19:47 LOG:   Processing file Content/SeriousSam3/Config/CheckDriver.lua
00:19:47 INF:   Driver version: 11903 (required: 12000)
00:19:47 WRN:   Display driver is too old, please update it ASAP!
00:19:47 LOG:   Loaded "D:\Steam\steamapps\common\Serious Sam 3\Bin\SfxXAD.dll".
00:19:47 LOG:   Loaded "X3DAudio1_7.dll".

00:19:50 INF:   AutoDetect: storing new settings: gfx_iPixelProgramVersion=30,gfx_ctConcurrentGPUs=1,sys_iGPUVendorID=4098,sys_iCPUFamily=15,sys_iCPUMHz=2793,sys_iGPUDeviceID=26456,sys_strCPUVendor=AuthenticAMD,gfx_ulVideoMemoryMB=1024,

[Kano]

The difference between the os was clearly visable, maybe it would not be so critical with the used card as it was often faster than 60 fps. Most likely it would be more interesting to test a card thats slower as there you could "feel" the difference then.

[mitcoes]

If Steam did notice Ubuntu was better for games performance than MS WOS why phoronix doesn't?

Ubuntu allows you too install several desktops

Why XFCE - my choose since Gnome2 died - is not listed, but why not openbox and Gnome classic - the Gnome shell in Ubuntu would need other installation from the Gbuntu one - but Cinnamon can be installed too easily at any ubuntu distro.

And of course as I have read here some settings for gaming at each desktop.

But Unity vs KDE vs XFCE vs openbox, vs E17, vs Cinnamon vs MS WOS bare metal with antivirus vs MS WOS bare metal without antivirus vs MS WOS at Xen VGA passthrough without antivirus would be a better test to read.

And it is rare all the resolutions were very high, for gaming 720p is the common choice now, becasue is twice faster than 1080p, and this 2 resolutions are what matters for gaming with 640x480 and 800x600 for old CRT good monitors.

MS WOS does some tricks when resolutions are high.

But benchmarking is not to test the higher conditions only, it is basically to compare the NORMAL conditions and the NORMAL - statistically speaking - is 720p and 1080p

And as a post from kwahoo shows 38 fps dx vs 53 fps open gl at 1080p at Serious Sam 3.with catalyst.

All this time MS WOS gamers using dx and opengl is better and faster, and I would like to see this same SS3 MS WOS benchmark at 720p that would make this game better to play with.

[Pallidus]

repeat after me:

linux is not for games.

linux is for pros.


if you want to play your little gay ass games fuck off to windows.

do what I did: get a laptop with intel graphics = not giving a shit about amd nightmarish linux support.

[storma]

repeat after me:

linux is not for games.

linux is for pros.

I don't care much for the pissing contest and at the end of the day I'm happy gaming on Linux, using catalyst.

[Sonadow]

And it is rare all the resolutions were very high, for gaming 720p is the common choice now, becasue is twice faster than 1080p, and this 2 resolutions are what matters for gaming with 640x480 and 800x600 for old CRT good monitors.

Rubbish. Take a good look at the settings most real gamers use on Windows. Almost always at 1600 x 900 or native 1080. With ULTRA settings to boot, and all extra features like 16x MSAA and DX11 extras turned ON. And by recently i mean 'within the past 8 months' recent.

Under these settings in Windows a good card can easily fetch above 70--80fps if vsync is disabled on a recently-released, high graphics requirement game. Which is a far cry from what the open Radeon driver can ever hope to achieve.

And as a post from kwahoo shows 38 fps dx vs 53 fps open gl at 1080p at Serious Sam 3.with catalyst.

And openGL looks TERRIBLE when compared to DX 11. Of course you don't experience lower framerates with shittier graphics quality.

[Kano]

@mitcoes

maybe you should open your eyes:

http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/linux/faster-zombies/

Do you see any amd gfx card mentioned? I only see gtx 680, the most common gfx card on earth.