Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 70

Thread: 15-Way Open vs. Closed Source NVIDIA/AMD Linux GPU Comparison

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    Why do you think intel is working on openGL 3 first when their real attention is toward 4? You can't just jump ahead and expect success.
    Actually, they are working on OGL 4 features first, and already have a good number of them implemented. They are also working on 3.2, but not because it's all that important, but because that would allow them to advertise the driver as OGL 3.2 compliant.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    You missed that the game is based on ancient engines that are CPU limited, not GPU limited.
    Same CPU though. So you may conclude that the driver code itself, while it may configure the GPU well, isn't very fast.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vim_User View Post
    Am I missing something? Except in Warsow and Reaction Quake an old 8800GT literally blows my HD6870 out of the water?
    Is there something I don't get or is AMD's closed source driver really that bad?
    My thoughts exactly. One of the main reasons I switched to NVIDIA cards mainly. Quite horrendous results for the HD6950, which is actually a good bang-for-the-buck card in Windows, however the lowly GTX550 seems to be on par or ahead in Linux! Also, the open source NVIDIA drivers traditionally perform much better on older hardware, which these benchmarks seem to prove.

    NVIDIA has the best closed source drivers and offer us the best 3D performance in Linux, not sure why people are still throwing around the "Fuck you NVIDIA" still. If you want open source, go Intel. If you want performance that actually comes close to the GPU's potential, go NVIDIA. I be more inclined to say "Fuck you AMD".

    Michael used a good mix of hardware here to demonstrate the pros and cons of using each GPU driver option. Many thanks!

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by enfocomp View Post
    NVIDIA has the best closed source drivers and offer us the best 3D performance in Linux, not sure why people are still throwing around the "Fuck you NVIDIA" still. If you want open source, go Intel. If you want performance that actually comes close to the GPU's potential, go NVIDIA. I be more inclined to say "Fuck you AMD".
    Somebody pointed that this extremly old games (all of them are very old or use extremly old engines) are not very good benchmark point.

    But even if you take that as true results that means much, we have now basicly on every (except some older ones) amd gpus uvd support.

    So very few intel solutions have gpu video decoding functionality under linux or at all, and in most cases such a intel system is more expensive than one from amd, also the ok amd driver gets way more fps in 3d stuff than most intel solutions because that gpus are just from the hardware either extremly slower or at least the newer ones still slower.

    So if you want to game and you care not at all about free drivers, maybe nvidia is the better solution for everything else NOW amd is the best solution.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    You missed that the game is based on ancient engines that are CPU limited, not GPU limited. when your system is kicking out frames faster then your screen can display them you are best off turning on Vsync since you are never going to see those frames save for maybe a small piece of them in a partial screen chop.
    I know how CPU limited benchmarks look like, all cards will perform on the same level when you hit the limit. This isn't at all the case here, here we see an old videocard that mobs the floor with a card that should be about twice as fast (if not more) and is so on Windows.

    So if this is really telling us something about AMD's driver quality then I also can only say: Fuck you AMD!

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vim_User View Post
    I know how CPU limited benchmarks look like, all cards will perform on the same level when you hit the limit. This isn't at all the case here, here we see an old videocard that mobs the floor with a card that should be about twice as fast (if not more) and is so on Windows.

    So if this is really telling us something about AMD's driver quality then I also can only say: Fuck you AMD!
    fuck you Vim_User, thats what I only can say then... whats your problem? I dont get it, linus said fuck you to nvidia because some stuff did not work not even with that garbage blob from nvidia, and because they dont give specs out or make drivers that uses gpl-only libs in the kernel and stuff like that.

    now you say fuck you to amd because you dont get much enough fps? why do you then not say fuck you 10 times intel, because they dont sell hardware that is able to produce 1/10 of the speed of amds speed in this tests?

    it just makes 0 sense, you are just a fanboy full of hate because you love nvidia or something?


    fuck you Vim_User!

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackiwid View Post
    fuck you Vim_User, thats what I only can say then... whats your problem? I dont get it, linus said fuck you to nvidia because some stuff did not work not even with that garbage blob from nvidia, and because they dont give specs out or make drivers that uses gpl-only libs in the kernel and stuff like that.

    now you say fuck you to amd because you dont get much enough fps? why do you then not say fuck you 10 times intel, because they dont sell hardware that is able to produce 1/10 of the speed of amds speed in this tests?
    You didn't get it all, did you? I am not complaining about the performance of the hardware, the hardware performs as expected under Windows. I have not bought an entry-level card here, like the Intel video units are, I have bought a midrange card that performs worse than a years old card. I do also not speak about the FOSS efforts of the different companies, I am talking about driver quality of the closed source driver.
    If the card performs well in one OS and the same hardware performs much slower than it should in a different OS then the hardware can hardly be at fault, it must be the software that is causing the issues. So I can conclude that the driver quality must be bad in Linux, so I say: Fuck you AMD for your bad driver quality.

    That should be clear from my last post, but for you I have pointed it out once more. If you still don't get it let me know, I will try to explain it once more in even simpler words then.

    it just makes 0 sense, you are just a fanboy full of hate because you love nvidia or something?
    It makes sense, only for you it doesn't. By the way, if I would be a fanboy of Nvidia I would post here how shitty AMD drivers are and how superior the drivers of my Nvidia card are. Only that I don't have a Nvidia card, my main systems are AMD only (CPU, chipset, GPU). I am complaining that the manufacturer of my videocard chose to deliver low quality Linux drivers.

    But of course a FOSS fanboy will see it as you seem to see it, AMD's driver quality doesn't matter, since they released specs off their hardware.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackiwid View Post
    Somebody pointed that this extremly old games (all of them are very old or use extremly old engines) are not very good benchmark point.

    But even if you take that as true results that means much, we have now basicly on every (except some older ones) amd gpus uvd support.

    So very few intel solutions have gpu video decoding functionality under linux or at all, and in most cases such a intel system is more expensive than one from amd, also the ok amd driver gets way more fps in 3d stuff than most intel solutions because that gpus are just from the hardware either extremly slower or at least the newer ones still slower.

    So if you want to game and you care not at all about free drivers, maybe nvidia is the better solution for everything else NOW amd is the best solution.
    I do agree that these were older games, would have liked to see some recent STEAM games compared as well. Michael said there was a bug using STEAM with the PTS so I doubt we will see any benchmarks for a while. Even so, the HD6950 should offer up to 175%+ the performance of the GTX550 all round, but they are almost on par in some of the tests here. I have compared a HD6970 and GTX560 side by side for some STEAM games (TF2, HL2 DM, etc) and the GTX560 was running a lot faster.

    Never had a game crash or not load with proprietary NVIDIA drivers, but have had a few issues with AMD.

    What don't you like about the nvidia proprietary drivers? I've never had major issues with them, and they seem to work well on my production machine. Not starting a flame war here, I'm just curious why some people hate the nvidia blob so much? I know they don't release their code like AMD does, but are open source politics really more important then having the fastest possible system? Please elaborate if possible.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108

    Default

    I have the next order of priorities for a hardware company:
    1 - Good "official" driver support for GNU/Linux (Proprietary or Open Source)
    2 - Maintain the basic "official" support for older hardware for a reasonable time.
    3 - That the company "officially" develop OpenSource drivers.
    4 - If not officially develops OpenSource drivers, at least collaborate with the community.

    In my point of view, nVidia meets "1" and "2", and with Optimus support on the way there will be no doubt.
    AMD only meets with "4"
    Intel meets "1", "3" and "4" regard to collaborate with the community. I really don't know about "2", because I'm new with Intel and I've had no previous experience.

    I have an Intel HD 4000 and an nVidia card. According to 'my' priorities, I think I made the right choice
    Last edited by YAFU; 04-29-2013 at 11:11 PM.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    310

    Default

    For me, AMD fullfills every point but 4. The proprietary driver works fine for me (*) and even the officially developed OSS driver is good! Heck, you'll have even hardware video decoding in Linux 3.10. only a more fine-grained power management is missing. but I bet we'll see that by the end of the year.


    (*) I don't care if the windows version or similar nvidia cards produce more frames I'm not going to use in benchmarks. I'd like to have a stable desktop (nvidia frequently crashes my X) and as a developer a spec conform driver.

Posting Permissions

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