Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 55

Thread: Why I Love AMD and Why You Need To Stop Whining

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    97

    Default Why I Love AMD and Why You Need To Stop Whining

    I have had a lot of experience with AMD products. I go back to the ATi Radeon X300 SE, which if my memory serves me right was one of the first PCI Express x16 GPUs. I have had a lot of experience with Linux as well, starting a year or two after the X300 SE. More recently, I have had experience with OpenGL programming. The current systems I have with AMD products are:

    Dell Dimension 8400 (with the mentioned ATi Radeon X300 SE)
    HP Pavilion dv6-6135dx (AMD A8-3500M APU which contains AMD Radeon HD 6620G GPU and also has a dedicated AMD Radeon HD 6750M GPU for Switchable and/or Dual Graphics)
    HP Envy m6-1205dx (AMD A10-4600M APU which contains AMD Radeon HD 7660G GPU)

    and I have had a few other AMD laptops. I have helped pick out for others or purchase for myself a total of 6 all-AMD laptops since October 2009 and I haven't had an issue with them nor have the ones I helped pick out.

    The main reason I go with AMD is the price to performance ratio, or "bang for your buck." For example, I picked up that HP Pavilion dv6-6135dx for $699, and that was bought the day it was released. To get an Intel system with comparable performance at that time, I would've had to spend at least double that amount. The system is also completely overclockable (CPU and both GPUs if you know what you're doing), even on Linux with a bit of programming and Linux kernel knowledge (it can't be overclocked via BIOS settings, it is overclocked via software). I'm able to run new release games with 90% of the bells and whistles turned on and have a playable framerate (40+ FPS).

    Now, I'll get into OpenGL and driver stuff. This is the stuff I see a lot of people complaining about around here.

    General Driver Complaints:
    - Doesn't support new X or Linux Kernel releases:
    If your Linux distro is using a new X or Linux Kernel release it is their responsibility to patch the driver to function on them properly. AMD doesn't rush officially supporting these newer releases because they take the time to ensure that there is no drop in driver performance or compatibility or other issues brought up by these new releases. They want to make sure the product they are putting their name on doesn't have those issues. I myself use Kubuntu 13.04 for Linux, and I use the xorg-edgers PPA repository which recently has had the fglrx packages updated quickly after new releases. They have them patched to support the newer Linux kernels and X releases. It works without a hitch on both of my aformentioned AMD laptops.

    - Poor 2D performance:
    This has been 100% resolved since the 12.6 release of the drivers.

    - I HAVE _issue_ AND IT ISN'T FIXED:
    Have you filed a bug report, including proper stack traces? Without doing this, there is no way for AMD to fix the issue.

    - _application_ WORKS WITH NVIDIA BUT NOT AMD:
    Nvidia's implementation of OpenGL is not to proper specifications. Application developers using Nvidia can end up having issues with AMD users because AMD properly implements OpenGL to the actual specifications, so the developer is using this non-standard OpenGL and expecting it to work everywhere. Complain to your developer and/or Nvidia. In my experience with OpenGL programming, I've ran into issues with Nvidia users because their OpenGL implementation doesn't behave properly! I'm forced to then check if a user is using an Nvidia GPU, and if so, having to use hackish workarounds or even disabling certain features for them. I have to do this for Intel as well, but not as often as I have had to in the past. Intel has definitely come a long way with GPUs recently and I applaud their efforts. Competition is good for everybody.

    Specific Driver Complaints:
    - Cannot resume from sleep:
    I have issues resuming from sleep when using the open-source radeon driver. When I install fglrx these issues go away. This has been reproduced on at least 3 AMD systems I've worked with so I have a hard time believing the people mention this are really being truthful or actually using fglrx.


    If you have other issues you'd like to bring up, I'll offer a rebuttal. This is only what I can think of at the time, I just can't stand to read another thread page full of trolling AMD on this forum. Even the articles themselves are biased here!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,090

    Default

    I wanted to ask you about your experience with A8 and video drivers, but I read you use catalyst.., so I have no questions then.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    97

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brosis View Post
    I wanted to ask you about your experience with A8 and video drivers, but I read you use catalyst.., so I have no questions then.
    I typically use the open-source drivers until I start getting into stuff using extensive OpenGL, and I used the open-source drivers on the A8 for about a month. It's decent for everyday tasks, but just doesn't hold up with the 3D stuff.


    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisXY View Post
    I had the opposite on an Acer 7741G with a HD 6550M. Resume would mostly not work with fglrx in the default configuration, would often work with fglrx when booted with the nopat kernel parameter and would always work with the open source driver.

    If you have a hard time believing it, then have a look at the bugtracker you recommend:

    http://ati.cchtml.com/show_bug.cgi?id=566
    http://ati.cchtml.com/show_bug.cgi?id=112
    http://ati.cchtml.com/show_bug.cgi?id=699
    http://ati.cchtml.com/show_bug.cgi?id=610
    http://ati.cchtml.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457
    http://ati.cchtml.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449
    etc., there are many more.

    Mine was some time ago and I don't have the notebook anymore so maybe it got fixed in the meantime.
    One of the reports you linked to reports the problem being fixed in Catalyst 12.9, and only one of the reports linked to includes at least some of the information developers need to fix an issue.


    Quote Originally Posted by Vim_User View Post
    Nonsense. It is AMD's duty to release drivers that actually work and not to rely on patches from third parties.

    So you are telling me that they have not released a driver that supports anything newer than a 9 months old kernel (I don't count 3.5 here, since it is already EOL) because they don't rush things? You must be kidding.

    So they let their image better being based on patches made by third parties they have no control over? That doesn't sound right to me.

    So you can tell us about the quality of their drivers shortly after you have installed them, but AMD is not able to do that in a reasonable timeframe? What does that tell us about AMD?
    Nonsense. From what I can tell the distros they list as officially being supported are supported in the official driver. If those distros want to support newer kernels in an in-development release (e.x. Ubuntu 13.04) that's their responsibility.

    3 months. It works fine with 3.6. There's no reason not to count an EOL kernel. In that case I'll count 3.4.34, released just yesterday. 1 day.

    Please rewrite this sentence, I only speak English.

    You said "shortly after you have installed them," indicating that you did not really read my whole post. Read the entire post and get back to me.


    Quote Originally Posted by Asariati View Post
    Since three years I am reporting that the default sizes for the desktops are too small, e.g. not possible to use two 24" screens at the same time. Needs manual xorg.conf modifcations. 2013 and manual xorg.conf modifications....
    Using HDMI and DVI forces both screens to the same resolution. Bad.


    Bought a XFX Radeon 7970 for my gaming rig. Installed Ubuntu 13.04 and fglrx. Getting "Unsupported Hardware"-overlay. Yeah, great. That card is on the market since years...
    Link me to bug reports with the information needed for developers to fix such an issue.

    Years? The Southern Islands GPUs were released around Christmas of 2011 if memory serves me right, so it hasn't been multiple years. If you installed fglrx from the official repositories, it was potentially outdated, and this would be the source of your issue.


    Quote Originally Posted by asdfblah View Post
    TL;DR.
    Why are you loving a corporation in the first place?
    Get out troll.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    295

    Default

    Stop whining ?

    When is took amd for more then a year after they released my hd5750, to support it?
    ( and with support I mean a good working catalyst driver)

    That is took Valve to get them to improve the drivers ?

    Its only since a few months i notice an improvement of the drivers.

    The reason I might get another amd card some day, is because of the opensource support, but more important it seems they changed their ways.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    97

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gps4l View Post
    Stop whining ?

    When is took amd for more then a year after they released my hd5750, to support it?
    ( and with support I mean a good working catalyst driver)

    That is took Valve to get them to improve the drivers ?

    Its only since a few months i notice an improvement of the drivers.

    The reason I might get another amd card some day, is because of the opensource support, but more important it seems they changed their ways.
    I don't think it took Valve to get them to improve the drivers. Catalyst 12.6 was a big turnaround for AMD, and Valve wasn't even close to a closed-beta of Steam then. The reason the performance of the drivers is still improving more recently "due to Valve" is that there is now a bigger interest in gaming on Linux than there ever has been, and Valve is playing a big role in that.


    Quote Originally Posted by brosis View Post
    Yes, thats why I went for Intel hardware instead of A8. I can't afford to risk this. On Intel, I know that hardware IntelHD sucks 3x compared to A8, but amd open driver performs at 10x slower rate, compared to Intel 1x, making Intel APU actually way faster than AMD. Plus SNA. And when I need performance, I think of nvidia GPU. Not much of opensource, but performs stable. And intel opensource and performs way faster. I think most people criticize AMD not due to opensource strategy, but due to how sadomasochistic it is. Badly performing driver will result in loss of customers, like myself,... its really sad. Thanks for response!
    You aren't making any sense in this post. You don't want AMD because of open-source issues, yet you like Nvidia which lacks any real open-source support. Intel doesn't even have proprietary drivers on Linux, it's all open-source. The Intel APU is not faster, and I've run into issues with even recent Intel hardware (I'm talking Ivy Bridge here!) with OpenGL going as far back as OpenGL 1.3.

    I guess what I'm saying is, you are saying the Intel GPU is 3x slower than the AMD GPU but then compare the open-source driver of the AMD GPU to the Intel GPU which then makes the Intel GPU 10x faster, yet when you need performance you want an Nvidia GPU which doesn't have real open-source support. That's a very unfair comparison. Throw AMD's proprietary drivers into the mix.


    Quote Originally Posted by Linuxhippy View Post
    Unfortunately the same is true for me. I've been a long-time fan of AMD processors, but now with mainstream GPUs integrated into the CPU die, I do not want the hassle this would bring. I can see what happend to a friend of mine, he is complaining all the time :/
    Better pay 200$ more and get first-class open-source drivers, than to use hardware which will be EOL before receiving proper drivers.
    I don't get what you're saying. "I've been a long-time fan of AMD processors, but now with mainstream GPUs integrated into the CPU die, I do not want the hassle this would bring." If you have a Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge CPU, it most likely has an integrated GPU (I say most likely because I remember there was at least 1 model that didn't have the integrated GPU), and there isn't any hassle with it. Also, Intel's open-source driver is first-class because it's their only driver.

  6. #6

    Default

    I thought I'd chime in on this one. The last AMD/ATi hardware I bought for a while now was the x800 Pro and my experience with fglrx was nothing short of abysmal. It went to the point that I had to hose my Redhat install to fix my system. Since then, I've steered very much clearly away from their stuff.

    That being said, I bought an HP Pavilion that came with the AMD hardware and the first thing I notice is that the open source driver makes the fan all noisy and chews up power like a hungry beast. Then I had issues with fglrx and my xorg version (1.13) until I grabbed the beta drivers. Since then, the power consumption seems OK and I can run fgl_glxgears now. LOL. I haven't tried the intel switchable graphics partially out of fear, but if anyone has experience on it, I'd like to hear them.

    There is enough documentation for most Linux people to navigate through the AMD nightmare, but I think AMD drivers will always play catch up to nVIDIA. I care about driver performance and AMD's fglrx drivers seems to always have something to complain about. Just five minutes ago, my laptop hit screen saver and when I tried to reactivate it, only the second screen would activate. Go figure. Just the way it has to be with AMD.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,090

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MWisBest View Post
    You aren't making any sense in this post. You don't want AMD because of open-source issues, yet you like Nvidia which lacks any real open-source support. Intel doesn't even have proprietary drivers on Linux, it's all open-source. The Intel APU is not faster, and I've run into issues with even recent Intel hardware (I'm talking Ivy Bridge here!) with OpenGL going as far back as OpenGL 1.3.

    I guess what I'm saying is, you are saying the Intel GPU is 3x slower than the AMD GPU but then compare the open-source driver of the AMD GPU to the Intel GPU which then makes the Intel GPU 10x faster, yet when you need performance you want an Nvidia GPU which doesn't have real open-source support. That's a very unfair comparison. Throw AMD's proprietary drivers into the mix.
    Regarding sense: http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...vs-Intel-G2xxx

    I don't like Nvidia, I prefer opensource drivers a lot. But in any case, the drivers should be stable and the hardware should perform well under them.

    If I use opensource drivers, the 2D is much worse than Intel due to EXA vs SNA and the 3D is much worse due to Intel driver working faster than AMD and even managing to deliver better overall performance on much worse hardware. But the CPU part of Ivy destroys the A8. That - staying in same price class of 70$ APU.

    If I use catalyst, well there is no point in any claim of any opensource drivers - is there? Then we compare closed source drivers vs closed source drivers - and in this case nvidia solution is more stable and has less bugs.

    So in the end, weighting all realistic components it was: AMD+Catalyst vs Intel+open drivers, 3d performance and instability vs 2d performance and stability.
    For desktop that I was targeting stability means a lot. And if my collegue decides he needs 3D performance, I can easily add 50$ nvidia card and have performance with better driver.

    I can't risk purchasing A8, I will punish myself and affect my reputation by doing that. Sure AMD started opensourcing first, but it is Intel who does the opensource driver the way its meant to be and nvidia who does the closed driver since ages the way its meant to be.

    In response you said, then "use catalyst", catalyst is completely and totally out of the question entirely. Which leads for me to "if AMD, then use ....". I wish you very best.
    Last edited by brosis; 03-02-2013 at 06:39 AM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    206

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MWisBest View Post
    I don't get what you're saying. "I've been a long-time fan of AMD processors, but now with mainstream GPUs integrated into the CPU die, I do not want the hassle this would bring." If you have a Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge CPU, it most likely has an integrated GPU (I say most likely because I remember there was at least 1 model that didn't have the integrated GPU), and there isn't any hassle with it.
    Exactly, I buy intel CPUs because of the excellent driver support for the built-in IGP.
    Buying an AMD CPU would also mean AMD IGP, and thats something I am not very enthusiastic about.

    Also, Intel's open-source driver is first-class because it's their only driver.
    Sure, but to be honest I don't care whats the reason for their excellent driver, as long as its stable and fast. The 2D performance offered by the intel driver is outstanding.
    I am not a gamer, so the Intel's OpenGL support/performance is good enough for me (heck, I can play steam games on my SNB notebook).

    Regards

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,090

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MWisBest View Post
    I typically use the open-source drivers until I start getting into stuff using extensive OpenGL, and I used the open-source drivers on the A8 for about a month. It's decent for everyday tasks, but just doesn't hold up with the 3D stuff.
    Yes, thats why I went for Intel hardware instead of A8. I can't afford to risk this. On Intel, I know that hardware IntelHD sucks 3x compared to A8, but amd open driver performs at 10x slower rate, compared to Intel 1x, making Intel APU actually way faster than AMD. Plus SNA. And when I need performance, I think of nvidia GPU. Not much of opensource, but performs stable. And intel opensource and performs way faster. I think most people criticize AMD not due to opensource strategy, but due to how sadomasochistic it is. Badly performing driver will result in loss of customers, like myself,... its really sad. Thanks for response!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    206

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brosis View Post
    Yes, thats why I went for Intel hardware instead of A8.
    Unfortunately the same is true for me. I've been a long-time fan of AMD processors, but now with mainstream GPUs integrated into the CPU die, I do not want the hassle this would bring. I can see what happend to a friend of mine, he is complaining all the time :/
    Better pay 200$ more and get first-class open-source drivers, than to use hardware which will be EOL before receiving proper drivers.

Posting Permissions

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