Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 70

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

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oleid View Post
    I don't care if the windows version or similar nvidia cards produce more frames I'm not going to use in benchmarks.
    This missing the point. If a card produces more FPS in a game in the standard configuration than needed that means I can use the power of the card to activate image enhancing features like Anti-Aliasing or Anisotropic Filtering. That I have to play the same game in a lower quality on Linux than I can in Windows (or with Nividia cards from a similar performance level) is simply disgusting, but for AMD's image with Linux gamers (combined with the lack of support/very late support for newer Xorg and kernel versions) it is destroying.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    313

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vim_User View Post
    This missing the point. If a card produces more FPS in a game in the standard configuration than needed that means I can use the power of the card to activate image enhancing features like Anti-Aliasing or Anisotropic Filtering. That I have to play the same game in a lower quality on Linux than I can in Windows (or with Nividia cards from a similar performance level) is simply disgusting, but for AMD's image with Linux gamers (combined with the lack of support/very late support for newer Xorg and kernel versions) it is destroying.
    I'm wondering if fglrx does use the same per-game optimizations on linux as on windows...

    How about comparing image quality too, instead of only bare performance numbers?

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    577

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wargames View Post
    Open source AMD drivers are in pretty good shape for desktop users. Fast enough for many 3D apps and almost support OpenGL 3.3. What I really miss is fully working OpenCL support.
    On older cards, yes, but again, not on the HD7000s.

    At the same time though, the open-source AMD Linux support for the Radeon HD 7000 series is still being brought up into a suitable state one and a half years after the Southern Islands debut.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    313

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Calinou View Post
    On older cards, yes, but again, not on the HD7000s.
    I guess this will be better for the following series. The 8000 is said to be quite similar to the 7000 series. So many things will work out of the box.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    840

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vim_User View Post
    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..
    I understand what your point is, just your point is stupid, if you wanted to play under linux games and you dont care about freedom at all, why would you buy a amd card. So because you had a windows and then switched to linux for gaming.

    So switching for linux for gaming is also retarded. So your points are just stupid. Your desitions are stupid, so dont blame amd for your stupidness.

    Who migrates from windows to linux, when he dont cares about freedom to play games? ???????

    How can somebody so stupid. I mean you could migrate to linux, if you dont care tooo much about games, and its good enough.

    Btw, if you dont pay the money for windows lisenses you can invest that money for a bigger grafic card.

    I understand that you want say "fuck you" to amd because you want more fps with the drivers, but thats just the stupidest reason to say fuck you to a company.

    Lets say it would be the other way around, lets say amd would have extreme fast linux drivers but very slow windows drivers.

    People would either be totaly stupid and buy it, and dont know about the difference, or they would look a review, BEFORE they buy the hardware, and then dont buy it.

    But everybody who would buy then amd hardware to play in windows games, and would bitch about the speed of the cards afterwards, when amd would not have advertised (this card has the same speed than the nvidia card for the same price) or something like that.


    You cant magicly assume that each linux drivers must have the same speed than the windows driver?

    Btw, even if you dont compare the intel driver to the faster amd hardware, the intel driver is even slower than the intel windows driver.

    So again you have to say fuck you intel too.


    UPDATE:

    BTW, who hinders you to buy a nvidia card, and sell your amd card in ebay or something like that?

    I could see somebody saying to amd fuck you because of powermanagement and video encoding, but the last is now gone and the first thing is also a update coming. But "fuck you" for not enough fps is so spupid.

    Whats then next, do you also say fuck you to amd when the freebsd drivers are not fast enough, or hurd drivers? You cant just except same level of fps for every os on the planet, and so not for this 2% desktop os Linux.

    Because thats true, thats one reason more to except instead of that from companies to give out the specs, so 3rd party people write the stuff thats needed.

    And it seems better free drivers are not needed that fast for amd hardware, it seems there are more 3rd party guys out there who develop nouvou in their free time then radeon drivers, but thats not amds fault they basicly hire everybody that makes some bigger improvements to the driver. Thats basicly more than we could hope for, but on the other side, they dont release ALL specs at the same time. (even now most of them shoudl be released).

    And here NVIDIA fails, to deliver anything, you can say I dont care to much about your freedom, but even you must agree that if nvidia would release that driver always opensource it would have at least slightly advantages.

    But forget it makes no sense to talk to some guy who switched to linux to play games to talk about freedom.

    Especialy with a changable card I dont get why you would fuck amd, if you would have a notebook with a fusion or igp card in it I could understand that argument, that you dont want to buy another notebook just because of the gpu, but a seperate graphics-card? Just sell it, and invest the money you dont pay for windows ontop of that money and have a more expensive amd or in your case more likely nvidia card and shut up...
    Last edited by blackiwid; 04-30-2013 at 05:56 AM.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YAFU View Post
    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
    AMD has paid developers, and meets "1", "3" and "4"

    I have intel 845, hd2000, hd2500, hd3000, nvidia 6100, 8300, 9600 gso, gtx280, ti560, amd 4200, mobility x1900, hd5850.
    Nvidias proprietary drivers are sufficient only on g80-modern hardware. Old hardware support is bad.
    Nouveau support is random. One can have on one card nearly everything and performs very good, on other card it crashes on daily basis.

    AMD official catalyst, I don´t test.
    AMD open source driver is better than nouveau, consistent over platforms, performance recently is very good. I can see this driver as ready for production level environiments, buts it has no dynamic powermanagement.

    Intel opensource support is good, consistent, but breaks more often as amd from time to time. Currently its 3d peformance advantage over amd opensource might actually fallback heavily, as amd gained performance (from 30-50 to 50-90). Hardware-wise intel is weak for 3d.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brosis View Post
    AMD has paid developers, and meets "1", "3" and "4"
    No, AMD was paying a couple of inexperienced developers for the "stillborn" "radeonhd" driver. The "radeon" driver is basically a community driver.

    Quote Originally Posted by brosis View Post
    Nvidias proprietary drivers are sufficient only on g80-modern hardware. Old hardware support is bad
    I was referring to official basic support on legacy drivers. Until very recently I've been using a fx-5200 drivers maintained by nVidia for each change of Xorg/xserver, and with good performance.
    AMD completely abandons official support for cards not too old. That's why they free up "part" of the specifications for the community to take care of this hardware. That is, you will not even have a bad performance with AMD official drivers. You "can not" install or use official AMD drivers in unsupported hardware.
    Last edited by YAFU; 04-30-2013 at 09:00 AM.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,929

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YAFU View Post
    No, AMD was paying a couple of inexperienced developers for the "stillborn" "radeonhd" driver. The "radeon" driver is basically a community driver.
    Why don't you read about a topic before you embarass yourself like this?

    AMD is paying many radeon developers: Alex Deucher, Christian König, Tom Stellard, and there were several more along the way, like Cooper Yuan and others.

    They are highly experienced developers who do 99% of the work for getting new hardware generations supported. The community also plays a huge role, with paid developers (Dave Airlie) and volunteers (Marek, Vadim...), and this is the way it is SUPPOSED to work!


    I've stuck with AMD because of their commitment to FLOSS drivers. Sometimes the progress seemed slow, but it is catching up. Once OpenCL and powersaving are ready, the accomplishment of what AMD and the community have achieved will be absolutely astonishing. Fully featured, fast, stable drivers capable of OpenCL, OpenGL 3+, with UVD and dynamic powersaving support. All this while NVIDIA did NOTHING. Nothing at all.

    Count that.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    Why don't you read about a topic before you embarass yourself like this?
    Embarrassed? No way.
    AMD and their developers should be ashamed for what they did with the "radeonhd" driver.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI, USA
    Posts
    874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wargames View Post
    Open source AMD drivers are in pretty good shape for desktop users. Fast enough for many 3D apps and almost support OpenGL 3.3. What I really miss is fully working OpenCL support.
    Any specific OpenCL applications that you want running via r600g? I've got my own pet project that I'd like to see supported (which is what I'm focusing on when writing new libclc code, piglit tests, and debugging R600), but it'd be nice to know of some other code that someone cares about that could also be tested against and targeted.

Posting Permissions

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