Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD A10-5800K "Trinity" APU On Linux

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by bug77 View Post
    Point #2: if there's more horespower than the embedded GPU can handle, you need a discrete GPU, not a crossfire setup.
    Point #3: what questionable about running several games on several CPUs, using the same GPU? It just shows games can benefit from a more powerful CPU.
    #2: Not when having the discrete system you're suggesting costs more. You compare by total cost of ownership or you're comparing about a metric that nobody really cares about.

    #3: Running the games on lower than normal settings so they'll use more CPU power than GPU power is questionable. Nobody would really do that unless they're trying to make a point whilst benchmarking. Those same games will be running at 1000 FPS in the future when we have CPUs and GPUs which far exceed todays. So yes, they can benefit from a more powerful CPU, but that point is completely and utterly stupid, just like yours is. You talk about performance per $, or you're not talking the same language as anyone else.

    Originally posted by bug77 View Post
    Two of the test I mentioned were using 1680x1050. Crysis was set at Mainstream details, Civ V at High Quality. Yet the difference was still there. I wish there were more in-depth tests out there. In the meantime, I'll take cold hard numbers over wishful thinking.
    Here are some cold hard numbers:-

    1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0.

    They're about as relevant as yours.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by ownagefool View Post
      Here are some cold hard numbers:-

      1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0.

      They're about as relevant as yours.
      They're not my numbers, they're Anand's. The only benchmark I could find that tests the impact of the CPU on gaming. I don't think it's irrelevant just because it doesn't support your point of view. Until you can show me benchmarks that say otherwise, you could at least have the courtesy not to call me names.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by bug77 View Post
        They're not my numbers, they're Anand's. The only benchmark I could find that tests the impact of the CPU on gaming. I don't think it's irrelevant just because it doesn't support your point of view. Until you can show me benchmarks that say otherwise, you could at least have the courtesy not to call me names.
        The problem with those numbers is they don't support your point of view.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by ownagefool View Post
          The problem with those numbers is they don't support your point of view.
          Then why are you so quick to dismiss them?
          And how come they don't support my point of view? If Trinity would have enough horsepower as to not bottleneck games, then more powerful CPUs wouldn't push more FPS. And again, two tests were run at 1680x1050 with pretty high settings.

          Comment


          • #50
            The numbers went sweet by till I saw that thats with Catalyst. Given the fact Intel driver is opensource, HD4k wins over this anyday.

            Comment


            • #51
              I've seen this for years and years. Fact, once you get to 1920x1080 or higher with max detail settings the CPU in by far not the limiting factor in bleeding edge game graphics tech.

              The CPU does however make an impact at all resolutions and detail settings when you are looking at high end RTS titles(hundreds-thousands of units doing stuff), flight simulators(MS Flight sim and its clones are completely CPU bound) or massive active world type games such as the Grand Theft Auto series(much like the RTS games, a ton of things happening at the same time).

              As for crossfire on an APU, it's actually a great idea for mid range cards provided you have fast enough RAM to allow the APU to stretch it's legs.

              Pairing an APU with a high end GPU, already being done, see the MSI GX60 http://www.msi.com/product/nb/GX60.html which is pairing the A10-4600m with an HD7970m in a 15" laptop. You get to have cake that isn't a lie, the HD7970m is only spooled up for heavy gaming and for heavy GPGPU tasks, when it isn't needed you get good all around performance and actual battery life so that you can use the laptop for actual work.

              It'll be interesting to see what happens with OpenCL and GPGPU for in game physics. These APUs would be perfect for use as physics co-processors in the same way that Nvidia does with low end cards and PhysX.

              Comment


              • #52
                Any news on what the problem is with OSS drivers and these new chips?

                IIRC, these are not GCN (southern islands) parts, they use Northern Islands GPU cores, and those are really well supported by r600g.

                Have AMD guys looked into this? Any tentative ETA?

                My motherboard is dying and since it's an AM2 socket thing, I'll need to replace the processor at the same time. I'd love to go for one of these APUs, but I'd rather skip the Llano parts and go with Piledriver. I have to replace one of the graphics card at the same time (multi-seat) so I'd rather have kernel and Mesa support it.

                Compiling from git is no problem.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                  Any news on what the problem is with OSS drivers and these new chips?

                  IIRC, these are not GCN (southern islands) parts, they use Northern Islands GPU cores, and those are really well supported by r600g.

                  Have AMD guys looked into this? Any tentative ETA?

                  My motherboard is dying and since it's an AM2 socket thing, I'll need to replace the processor at the same time. I'd love to go for one of these APUs, but I'd rather skip the Llano parts and go with Piledriver. I have to replace one of the graphics card at the same time (multi-seat) so I'd rather have kernel and Mesa support it.

                  Compiling from git is no problem.
                  They should work fine with the open source drivers. There were some display problems with certain configurations, but those should all be fixed now with the fixes in 3.6 kernels and newer as well as the stable series kernels. 3D is supported in mesa 8.0.5 and 9.0.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by agd5f View Post
                    They should work fine with the open source drivers. There were some display problems with certain configurations, but those should all be fixed now with the fixes in 3.6 kernels and newer as well as the stable series kernels. 3D is supported in mesa 8.0.5 and 9.0.
                    Fantastic.

                    Thanks for the quick reply!

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      The same stable kernels that have the ext4 corruption by any chance?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by agd5f View Post
                        They should work fine with the open source drivers. There were some display problems with certain configurations, but those should all be fixed now with the fixes in 3.6 kernels and newer as well as the stable series kernels. 3D is supported in mesa 8.0.5 and 9.0.
                        I got a Trinity laptop and installed Ubuntu 12.10 and with the default kernel (3.5) and FOSS drivers it's looking great. 3D works WAAAY better than Catalyst, very stable, BUUUT, it kills my battery in less than 2 hours and heats A LOT, so I'm stuck with buggy catalyst for now. Are these problems already solved in newer kernels?

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by jntesteves View Post
                          I got a Trinity laptop and installed Ubuntu 12.10 and with the default kernel (3.5) and FOSS drivers it's looking great. 3D works WAAAY better than Catalyst, very stable, BUUUT, it kills my battery in less than 2 hours and heats A LOT, so I'm stuck with buggy catalyst for now. Are these problems already solved in newer kernels?
                          They are not solved, and will not be properly solved until dynamic power management is merged -- it is currently stuck in technical review, and nobody knows how long that will take.

                          In the meantime, you can use profile-based power management and force low power mode by default (enough for the desktop). Switch to high profile if you need 3d power for something manually. See http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature for more info.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                            They are not solved, and will not be properly solved until dynamic power management is merged -- it is currently stuck in technical review, and nobody knows how long that will take.

                            In the meantime, you can use profile-based power management and force low power mode by default (enough for the desktop). Switch to high profile if you need 3d power for something manually. See http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature for more info.
                            Thank you for the answer Pingu. I had seen that page before and, if you are right and it's not working yet, then there's something to be corrected on that page because it's clearly saying that dynpm is working with kernel 2.6.35!!! and up, and on the feature matrix is written DONE in every square for Northern Islands.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by jntesteves View Post
                              BUUUT, it kills my battery in less than 2 hours and heats A LOT
                              Did you disable dGPU?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by RussianNeuroMancer View Post
                                Did you disable dGPU?
                                I didn't disable anything. I'm just running stock Ubuntu 12.10 here. I didn't really tried looking into it yet. Now I'm testing Catalyst 12.11 beta but it's still in a very sad state. Unfortunately I was expecting to do some gaming on Wine with this laptop as I was doing easily with my old desktop with a HD3000 discrete gfx card, but it's really not possible anymore. Look's like both Catalyst and Wine are way worst now than they were about 2 years ago. I'm trying here the same things I used to run and none work anymore, so, can't play games on Linux with my new laptop. I think it's time to give the free driver another chance. If it can just give me a smooth desktop to work on with long battery life and without burning my lap, that's good enough for now.

                                The sad thing is, I didn't have a dual boot and could do whatever I wanted with my Ubuntu desktop for years and now I can't. I don't use Windows for about 4 years now. It feels very awkward to go back to it just for playing the same games I used to play on Linux.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X