Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: Radeon Gallium3D Gets Important Cayman Fixes

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,784

    Default Radeon Gallium3D Gets Important Cayman Fixes

    Phoronix: Radeon Gallium3D Gets Important Cayman Fixes

    Released today was a new version of the DRM library and adjoining Mesa changes to address MSAA texture issues affecting AMD Radeon Evergreen and Cayman graphics hardware running the open-source Gallium3D driver...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTM3MjM

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    @Michael...

    If you are using high end gpu's on the catalyst driver then you are an idiot. Stop recommending to people to be idiots.

    The fact is catalyst is a buggy steaming pile of worthless crap. The OSS driver is incomplete true, but it's stable. Period. End of story. Nuff said.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,889

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by duby229 View Post
    @Michael...

    If you are using high end gpu's on the catalyst driver then you are an idiot. Stop recommending to people to be idiots.

    The fact is catalyst is a buggy steaming pile of worthless crap. The OSS driver is incomplete true, but it's stable. Period. End of story. Nuff said.
    Its buggy, yes, but if they paid the couple hundred bucks FOR a high performance graphics card... It'd be really hard to tell them "Well here use the FOSS driver, you get like half the performance (50%-70%) but its a little more stable...also theres no power management so if you're in a laptop, youre really screwed."

    Quite honestly, if the FOSS driver could even just get proper PM i'd be more than happy to use it and take the performance hit. But my laptop's battery is like a half hour on the FOSS driver (even at low), and the fan is ALWAYS running, even at low which is really annoying when im trying to watch a movie or something.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Of course people are free to use what they want. I'm biased and I know I am.

    My complaint about this article is that it was a feature that was broken and now fixed on the OSS driver. It had nothing whatsoever to do with catalyst. Dogging the OSS driver and pimping the catalyst driver in this context was just plain wrong.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Kansas.
    Posts
    262

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ericg View Post
    ...also theres no power management so if you're in a laptop, youre really screwed."
    Yes. Exactly. PM is the reason I don't use linux currently. (I have a laptop, and with catalyst, suspend/resume doesn't work :-( & if I use the open source driver, it tries to wear out the fan while setting my pants on fire )

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by duby229 View Post
    @Michael...

    If you are using high end gpu's on the catalyst driver then you are an idiot. Stop recommending to people to be idiots.

    The fact is catalyst is a buggy steaming pile of worthless crap. The OSS driver is incomplete true, but it's stable. Period. End of story. Nuff said.
    I think it's perfectly valid to recommend the Catalyst blob for high performance cards as they are most likely purchased for their high performance. If the user doesn't care too much about performance they're better off paying less for a lower end card, where I'd happily recommend the OSS driver.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gigaplex View Post
    I think it's perfectly valid to recommend the Catalyst blob for high performance cards as they are most likely purchased for their high performance. If the user doesn't care too much about performance they're better off paying less for a lower end card, where I'd happily recommend the OSS driver.
    I highly disagree. Recommending catalyst is exactly the same thing as recommending daily crashes, rendering glitches, memory leaks and a host of other even worse dual monitor problems. Why would you do that to folks who spent their hard earned money on high end hardware?

    EDIT: and like I said this article wasnt even about catalyst. It didnt have anything to do with catalyst. It shouldnt have even been mentioned. I just simply don't agree with dogging the OSS driver and hocking catalyst when catalyst is sooooo much worse.
    Last edited by duby229; 05-16-2013 at 12:37 AM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by duby229 View Post
    I highly disagree. Recommending catalyst is exactly the same thing as recommending daily crashes, rendering glitches, memory leaks and a host of other even worse dual monitor problems. Why would you do that to folks who spent their hard earned money on high end hardware?

    EDIT: and like I said this article wasnt even about catalyst. It didnt have anything to do with catalyst. It shouldnt have even been mentioned. I just simply don't agree with dogging the OSS driver and hocking catalyst when catalyst is sooooo much worse.
    I've used Catalyst before and it was never that bad for me, the only real issue was inability to recover from S3 sleep. I also don't personally recommend Catalyst on Linux, I was merely saying that if a user is paying big bucks for performance hardware to use on Linux they probably want some performance out of it.

    As for what I did? I pulled my HD 5670 (running OSS drivers) from my system and instead used the integrated Intel graphics. I don't like a hot, noisy GPU that doesn't add any advantages - where the Intel was too slow the 5670 was also too slow on the OSS driver. Then systemd broke my install (thanks Arch) and I gave up dualbooting that system.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,889

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gigaplex View Post
    As for what I did? I pulled my HD 5670 (running OSS drivers) from my system and instead used the integrated Intel graphics. I don't like a hot, noisy GPU that doesn't add any advantages - where the Intel was too slow the 5670 was also too slow on the OSS driver. Then systemd broke my install (thanks Arch) and I gave up dualbooting that system.
    While running the risk of starting a flame war...you've piqued my curiousity.

    How the hell did systemd break your install on Arch? The systemv-compat package, which is a dependency on systemd even today, makes systemd parse rc.conf for daemons and modules so you should have gotten the exact same install when you rebooted after the update so that you could then run "systemctl enable ...." for all your daemons that were listed in rc.conf so that systemd would then handle them natively.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ericg View Post
    While running the risk of starting a flame war...you've piqued my curiousity.

    How the hell did systemd break your install on Arch? The systemv-compat package, which is a dependency on systemd even today, makes systemd parse rc.conf for daemons and modules so you should have gotten the exact same install when you rebooted after the update so that you could then run "systemctl enable ...." for all your daemons that were listed in rc.conf so that systemd would then handle them natively.
    Don't exactly know, it just hung during boot and I gave up after a couple of hours trying to diagnose it.

Posting Permissions

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