Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

XFX Radeon HD 4350 DDR2 1GB PCIe will it work on ubuntu

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
    I would filter HD4850 out just upfront. The problem is: it is older chip(as the rest of 4xxx) and has GDDR3 memory. HD4770 is newer technology chip(the only in HD4xxx that has nm technology from HD5xxx) with 40nm manufacturing.

    HD4770 is slower than HD4850 up to 20%. But, HD4850 eats up to double wattage 140W(almost as nv8800GT) vs 80W for that 20%. You can overclock HD4770 to match 4850(but not in linux yet, unless you want to reflash VGA Bios, which is risky). Also HD4770 idles 20W - 4850 40W.


    HD5770 is awesome chip too, HD4770 taken to OpenGL4.0, but of course your only default choice for 3D and 2D would be buggy fglrx.

    I have chosen 4770 with intention to upgrade to 5770 once it will be supported by opensource driver(accel 2D and 3D, powermanagement).
    Where do you get that the TDP/Total wattage of the 4850 is 140w? The sources I find illustrate it to be 110w. I am confused. I read that the 4850 runs a bit hotter than 4770 or can be louder (as the fan must run faster to cool it down, perhaps?). But, I thought the power consumption is close to the 4770 if a bit more.

    You make good points for the 4770, however. Yet, the 4850 comes in 1GB versions while the 4770 is only 512mb, I think.

    Originally posted by Hans
    I would bye the newer 5xxx series, even though the support is not that good in fglrx yet. Why? Because from my point of view, fglrx is improving very fast and stable 5xxx should arrive soon. With the latest fglrx drivers (10.5), many problems regarding wine and xvba have been solved.

    Actually I can't give you an example where my fglrx fails anymore. Kinde boring stable actually. oh there is one point though. Better 2D support. But as far as I know, it will arrive next month with 10.6?
    I suppose I could wait for support and just use the latest Ubuntu or OpenSUSE (whatever distro seems to work best with it). Eventually, Evergreen cards will work in the latest distro versions as it will be supported by ATI/AMD, right? I mean, the support will be more extensive eventually.

    But, that forces me to wait more when certain/various distros 'update' until ATI/AMD catch up with that series of card. With my Nvidia card, I don't have to. With an 'older gen' of card (HD 4xxx) of ATI card, I don't have to. Even the newer Fermi, I might not have to? But, I prefer Evergreen cards over those, definitely.

    With the Evergreen 5770 about $40 more than the 4850 and $70 more than the 4770, it's a bit hard to justify. But for a cooler running newer card, it is way easier to pay the extra cost. I prefer XFX since I'd get the lifetime warranty so it might have a bit more value - and maybe easier to upgrade.

    Thanks for the info and 'hands on' experience you guys have with your cards! Although, I hate to admit I dual boot with Windows, at least I could go to that if the Evergreen card 'struggles' in certain Linux operating systems. That's a last resort, though, that I'd rather not have to consider.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Panix View Post
      Where do you get that the TDP/Total wattage of the 4850 is 140w? The sources I find illustrate it to be 110w. I am confused. I read that the 4850 runs a bit hotter than 4770 or can be louder (as the fan must run faster to cool it down, perhaps?). But, I thought the power consumption is close to the 4770 if a bit more.

      You make good points for the 4770, however. Yet, the 4850 comes in 1GB versions while the 4770 is only 512mb, I think.

      I suppose I could wait for support and just use the latest Ubuntu or OpenSUSE (whatever distro seems to work best with it). Eventually, Evergreen cards will work in the latest distro versions as it will be supported by ATI/AMD, right? I mean, the support will be more extensive eventually.

      But, that forces me to wait more when certain/various distros 'update' until ATI/AMD catch up with that series of card. With my Nvidia card, I don't have to. With an 'older gen' of card (HD 4xxx) of ATI card, I don't have to. Even the newer Fermi, I might not have to? But, I prefer Evergreen cards over those, definitely.

      With the Evergreen 5770 about $40 more than the 4850 and $70 more than the 4770, it's a bit hard to justify. But for a cooler running newer card, it is way easier to pay the extra cost. I prefer XFX since I'd get the lifetime warranty so it might have a bit more value - and maybe easier to upgrade.

      Thanks for the info and 'hands on' experience you guys have with your cards! Although, I hate to admit I dual boot with Windows, at least I could go to that if the Evergreen card 'struggles' in certain Linux operating systems. That's a last resort, though, that I'd rather not have to consider.
      i have a 4670 1gb vram and wana upgrade to an 5570 2GB vram (120€) (in my point of view its not important to have the fastest card but to have much vram and the newest openGL version is very important.)

      the question is why buy an outdates card?

      your problem is you can't imagine the future.

      10-5 fixes a lot of wine problems for me.. and i'm sure the 10-6 driver fixes the most of problems for hd5000 card's!

      more openGL fixes direct2d as a standart 3D acceleration very very fast!

      and i know abaut the viedeo acceleration it comes to HD5000 cards to! (i don't know 10-6 or 10-7)

      and yes the R600g driver will become a R800g driver to! openGL3 will come to the opensource driver to! and a shader based viedeo acceleration to..

      why you can't imagine the future?

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
        i have a 4670 1gb vram and wana upgrade to an 5570 2GB vram (120€) (in my point of view its not important to have the fastest card but to have much vram and the newest openGL version is very important.)

        the question is why buy an outdates card?

        your problem is you can't imagine the future.

        10-5 fixes a lot of wine problems for me.. and i'm sure the 10-6 driver fixes the most of problems for hd5000 card's!

        more openGL fixes direct2d as a standart 3D acceleration very very fast!

        and i know abaut the viedeo acceleration it comes to HD5000 cards to! (i don't know 10-6 or 10-7)

        and yes the R600g driver will become a R800g driver to! openGL3 will come to the opensource driver to! and a shader based viedeo acceleration to..

        why you can't imagine the future?
        Only two reasons to get an outdated, older generation card:
        1) price - the better outdated cards are cheaper averaging about $100 or so..4850 for e.g.
        2) ATI support in Linux - really slow but the outdated cards are already supported... not sure if it's extensive but the support is more extensive than support for Evergreen cards!

        If the support was quicker and more up to date, I'd go Evergreen, no hesitation... one can't even use this card in Fedora 13 yet save for VESA drivers!

        I want to 're-do' my HDD in my main machine, my desktop, and install Lucid Lynx, Fedora 13 and maybe OpenSUSE. Any more experimenting, I'll do in Virtualbox since I'll devote a 100+GB partition for Ubuntu.

        But, ATI won't (or can't) invest enough resources for drivers in Linux so the wait for driver development is SOOOOO slow. It's sad that the poorly designed Fermi cards are supported way faster than Evergreen cards.

        I can't predict the future but I know what's going to happen if I get an Evergreen card: I'll be forced to boot Windoze 50+% of the time on my desktop.

        Then, I'll be using Linux on my laptop... can't do much about what GPU is in there, right?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Panix View Post
          Only two reasons to get an outdated, older generation card:
          1) price - the better outdated cards are cheaper averaging about $100 or so..4850 for e.g.
          2) ATI support in Linux - really slow but the outdated cards are already supported... not sure if it's extensive but the support is more extensive than support for Evergreen cards!

          If the support was quicker and more up to date, I'd go Evergreen, no hesitation... one can't even use this card in Fedora 13 yet save for VESA drivers!

          I want to 're-do' my HDD in my main machine, my desktop, and install Lucid Lynx, Fedora 13 and maybe OpenSUSE. Any more experimenting, I'll do in Virtualbox since I'll devote a 100+GB partition for Ubuntu.

          But, ATI won't (or can't) invest enough resources for drivers in Linux so the wait for driver development is SOOOOO slow. It's sad that the poorly designed Fermi cards are supported way faster than Evergreen cards.

          I can't predict the future but I know what's going to happen if I get an Evergreen card: I'll be forced to boot Windoze 50+% of the time on my desktop.

          Then, I'll be using Linux on my laptop... can't do much about what GPU is in there, right?
          ? if the 10-6 catalyst do not bang boom boom you can buy a fermi

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Panix View Post
            Where do you get that the TDP/Total wattage of the 4850 is 140w? The sources I find illustrate it to be 110w. I am confused.
            In the link, Ive posted, dude...
            Look at "Leistungsaufnahme Graphikkarte" - Graphics card power consumtion table.
            Thats Furmark tests, they crash burn GPU to 110% extreme load.
            The dudes at HT4U have once crashburned 9800GT Green(that I had) so it crashed because it requested over >75W from PCIE at their test, but officials never expected it to be over that value.
            Thats are values that are total max that graphic card consumes alone! (not system!)
            Load:
            AMD Radeon HD 4770 (Default-Kühler) - 82W(80W claimed officially)
            Radeon HD 4850 - 148W(140W claimed officially)
            Radeon HD 4870 1024 MB - 187W

            I suspect HD4830 lies in 110W range.
            If you look at perfomance(weaker<stronger):
            HD4830<HD4770<HD4850<HD4870


            Idle(what you do 99,3% of time):
            AMD Radeon HD 4770 (Default-Kühler) 32W

            Radeon HD 4850 42W
            I suspect HD4830 to be 40W.

            Other than this, the standard cooler drains to much.
            My card didnt have that "reference cooler" and I have replaced it with more efficient Arctic Cooling Accelero l2 pro(cost 9€).
            I cannot hear it, works with 7v connector(you can attach 12v), gpu(messed in winblows) never goes over 50C.
            Well, AC Acc l2 was designed for 9800gt with its 140W.

            Of course 4870 is faster, but the price, the heat, the watts. Its basically 4770 with more shaders, same gddr5, but gpu itself older technology.

            Originally posted by Panix View Post
            I read that the 4850 runs a bit hotter than 4770 or can be louder (as the fan must run faster to cool it down, perhaps?). But, I thought the power consumption is close to the 4770 if a bit more.
            No 4850 eats much much more. Firstly less efficient gddr3. Second - prev.gen fabrication process. Third - more electronics on PCB. Even 4830 drains more than 4770.

            Originally posted by Panix View Post
            You make good points for the 4770, however. Yet, the 4850 comes in 1GB versions while the 4770 is only 512mb, I think.
            Ha, no, Im not a marketing guy That happens when you spend whole night researching gpus detailed.


            Originally posted by Panix View Post
            I suppose I could wait for support and just use the latest Ubuntu or OpenSUSE (whatever distro seems to work best with it). Eventually, Evergreen cards will work in the latest distro versions as it will be supported by ATI/AMD, right? I mean, the support will be more extensive eventually.

            But, that forces me to wait more when certain/various distros 'update' until ATI/AMD catch up with that series of card. With my Nvidia card, I don't have to. With an 'older gen' of card (HD 4xxx) of ATI card, I don't have to. Even the newer Fermi, I might not have to? But, I prefer Evergreen cards over those, definitely.

            With the Evergreen 5770 about $40 more than the 4850 and $70 more than the 4770, it's a bit hard to justify. But for a cooler running newer card, it is way easier to pay the extra cost. I prefer XFX since I'd get the lifetime warranty so it might have a bit more value - and maybe easier to upgrade.

            Thanks for the info and 'hands on' experience you guys have with your cards! Although, I hate to admit I dual boot with Windows, at least I could go to that if the Evergreen card 'struggles' in certain Linux operating systems. That's a last resort, though, that I'd rather not have to consider.
            Evergreen still has no good opensource support. Closed source, yes. But then, you better go with nvidia. They are the masters of closed source, haha. I went with AMD only because of opensource drivers. I have bought high-perf. card and quad core cpu from them, only because of this. Call me a consumer with brains(rare, no?), if you wish.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Panix View Post
              It's sad that the poorly designed Fermi cards are supported way faster than Evergreen cards.
              Thats because you are running windows drivers on linux with nvidia. Thats why they cannot open the source, cannot support Xorg properly and handle linux as second-class; but release fast and on the same graphical tests you can reliably mess linux always fall 20% behind winblows (unless its cpu intensive,ie kernel, then linux will win). Well, it is currently fastest 3D solution, but it lacks (and will always lack) any point where linux can actually use its main feature to go in lead.

              If you look at software performance(ie recoding, databases, processing etc) linux LEADS on opensource apps.

              In 3D it is slowed down by:
              a) a company that handles it as second-class system, never opens source and hence hardware+linux software solutions always fall behind winblows with performance to have no choice to go up or on-par(no one can improve it beside them, and they simply dont care).

              b) a company that does opensource, but .. ugh,.. slooow. It still carries its closed source driver, that is many times worse than (a), unless workstation tasks. A company that cannot deside? Well at least it does(together with some community effort) opensource and its 3D is usable.

              c) a company that does only opensource in linux. But its opensource drivers performance is messed to be 5-6 times slower than on closed source winblows. Wtf, no? And it has no hardware capable of something average 3D currently.

              Great 3D situation, no? The choice is yours. I went (b) and abadoned (a).

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Panix View Post
                With the Evergreen 5770 about $40 more than the 4850 and $70 more than the 4770, it's a bit hard to justify.
                If you do not want Opengl4 effects in linux(any apps using them?) and can live with opengl3.2 - go 4770. This is the only difference to my knowledge.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                  If you do not want Opengl4 effects in linux(any apps using them?) and can live with opengl3.2 - go 4770. This is the only difference to my knowledge.
                  the hd3000 and hd4000 do have a broken openCL gpu-cache! (its emulatet by software over the vram/ram)

                  if you wana use openCL in the future only HD5000 brings you full speed!

                  but only hd5850 and up do have full 64bit power!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                    Call me a consumer with brains(rare, no?), if you wish.
                    We call them "sucker with money to blow".

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                      the hd3000 and hd4000 do have a broken openCL gpu-cache! (its emulatet by software over the vram/ram)

                      if you wana use openCL in the future only HD5000 brings you full speed!

                      but only hd5850 and up do have full 64bit power!
                      Where do you have this information from?
                      HD3xxx isn't even supported with opencl.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Hans View Post
                        Where do you have this information from?
                        HD3xxx isn't even supported with opencl.
                        in openCL there are 2 gpu caches ...

                        the hd3xxx can handle openCL but the 2 gpu caches are broken. so the speed is low low lowest low!

                        the hd4xxx series do have 1 broken-cache so the speed is low to but better than hd3xxx

                        yes because of this amd do not support openCL on hd3xxx cards!

                        only hd5xxx cards have full compatible gpu caches for openCL!

                        if you don't belive search in the forum about openCL there is a threat startet by me and bridgman write there to ;-)

                        if you don't believe me call bridgman for this!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Hans View Post
                          Where do you have this information from?
                          HD3xxx isn't even supported with opencl.
                          http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21287


                          "Each new generation has additional inter-thread hardware support and there's a certain level required for a full, fast OpenCL implementation. IIRC the global data share (GDS) was added to rv670 first, and local data share (LDS) was added to rv770 first, and both of them are required for OpenCL. "
                          Bridgman

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                            http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21287


                            "Each new generation has additional inter-thread hardware support and there's a certain level required for a full, fast OpenCL implementation. IIRC the global data share (GDS) was added to rv670 first, and local data share (LDS) was added to rv770 first, and both of them are required for OpenCL. "
                            Bridgman
                            and this : ""To be (hopefully) precise, the LDS in RV770 isn't used in OCL, and will probably never be used there, as its access model is too restrictive to fit the specification.""

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                              We call them "sucker with money to blow".
                              We?? Seriously, you all guys should seek psychologist attention.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                                We?? Seriously, you all guys should seek psychologist attention.
                                We are not the ones suffering from grandiosity.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X