Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 37

Thread: Radeon Gallium3D Improvements Compared To Legacy Catalyst

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    198

    Default

    Thanks for the great benchmark Michael, I was waiting the whole week to see how much open source drivers are in par with Catalyst

    Quote Originally Posted by edoantonioco View Post
    I dont understand how AMD leave us without legacy driver support, that should be illegal, we bought their hardware, and they dont give us updated drivers. Thats not fair at all.
    Fortunately open source drivers are providing good power management (thanks to agd5f) and we will hopefully see full OpenGL 3.2/3.3 support in next few Mesa releases. That's pretty enough for me right now, and to be honest I don't care much about UVD and OpenCL support.

    But yeah, I won't fall in AMD trap anymore. I prefer to spend a few more bucks and buy an expensive NVIDIA card next time with day one OpenGL 4.x support and not beg ages for essential functionalities.

  2. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ericg View Post
    Isn't the 4870 the card that everyone always asks Michael "Whats wrong with your card?" because its performance numbers are out of whack with similar cards?
    No, that's the HD 6570. Not the 4870s. I have many HD 4870s as that was back during the days when AMD sent out globs of hardware and all of my HD 4870s are performing about the same.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boot View Post
    Hasn't been updated since January.

    With these requirements: Automated installer and Display Drivers for Xorg 6.9 to Xserver 1.12 and Kernel version up to 3.4

    Maybe people are stuck with Xserver 1.12 (which is not that bad), however, the legacy driver seems to work fine with kernels at least up to 3.11 (properly patched, of course) [1]

    [1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php...ial_repository

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    198

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sandain View Post
    They are providing updated drivers via the OSS radeon driver, nearly fully supporting your hardware [1]. Why should they be required (by law!?!) to maintain two drivers when they have given us (the OSS community) a much better solution than originally provided by fglrx?
    Problem is that we are getting charged for fglrx drivers, but support we get in exchange is just a few Linux driver developers.

    Quote Originally Posted by sandain View Post
    Besides, if you still want to run the fglrx legacy driver, no one is stopping you from running it on the still supported Ubuntu 12.10.
    Features and security issues addressed in new Linux kernel and xorg releases?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,921

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    No, that's the HD 6570. Not the 4870s. I have many HD 4870s as that was back during the days when AMD sent out globs of hardware and all of my HD 4870s are performing about the same.
    Okie Dokie Wasn't sure and I didn't want to rip on the benchmark without asking first. Honestly a little surprised at performance for this card because I thought this class of hardware was doing better than that o_O

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    204

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edoantonioco View Post
    In my case, I think source games runs a bit better (hd42000) in linux free driver than in windows (thats something
    ???

    I have HD4200 as well and I tried TF2 with it running the open source drivers and the game was pretty much unplayable (less than 5 fps no matter what settings I had used).

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sandain View Post
    They are providing updated drivers via the OSS radeon driver, nearly fully supporting your hardware [1].
    Unless you happen to have a RS780/880 or RV790, then you get no UVD support at all. Quite funny, since the RS880 is still sold today and still the standard IGP for AMD's top of the line FX CPUs. Basically, AMD is saying a loud "Fuck You!!!" to anyone that wants a FX or Phenom II CPU, but needs an IGP. Meanwhile, Nvidia, the company without all the console deals to make money from, updated their legacy drivers to work with the latest kernel and Xserver, supporting their product line back to 2004.
    AMD in comparison: Products from 2007, with a 3.4 kernel and Xserver 1.12. Wanna try F2FS on your new SSD? AMD says: Only if you use inofficial patches. Wanna have the new fixed power-management? AMD says: "Fuck you, not with our driver!".

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vim_User View Post
    Unless you happen to have a RS780/880 or RV790, then you get no UVD support at all.
    Hah, at first I interpreted this sentence as "Unless you happen to have a RS780/880 or RV790, you get no UVD support at all", while it's obviously meant to be "Unless you happen to have a RS780/880 or RV790. In which case you get no UVD support at all".

    Quote Originally Posted by Vim_User View Post
    Wanna have the new fixed power-management? AMD says: "Fuck you, not with our driver!".
    No, they're saying "hold on, we need to pass technical review first".

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,219

    Default Do the Oibaf drivers use the LLVM backend

    Compiled with --enable-llvm or whatever the Mesa flag is?

    I wonder if the "old" backend might give better results, since i don't think the llvm backend has focused as much on older hardware. It's interesting to see how much better optimized the Evergreen results seem to be compared to these r700 results.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by synaptix View Post
    ???

    I have HD4200 as well and I tried TF2 with it running the open source drivers and the game was pretty much unplayable (less than 5 fps no matter what settings I had used).
    Thats weird, because TF2 runs very good in my pc. Of course, I have "r600 back-end" activated and the DPM thing too.

Posting Permissions

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