Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Catalyst 9.12 Hotfix released

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

  • #51
    Originally posted by kano
    What is your gain with a DX11 capable card with Linux when it has several known drawbacks and absolutely no aspect where it is better? If it would allow you to play games with Tessellation (like Q always mentions) NOW then you would have got at least a small advantage, but i definite see none.
    You'd have to remove your green-colored glasses in order to see the advantages, but that's unlikely so let me help you:

    The only thing you lose going with Ati right now, is VDPAU. In exchange, you get lower power consumption, more features (3d capabilities, triple-head) and better performance than any Nvidia card you could buy at a comparable price.

    If you wanted a Linux HTPC it would be best to go with a low-end Nvidia just for VDPAU. In all other cases, an Ati card is a far better investment.

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
      The 5870 is a $350 card (mid-high end). The GTX295 is a $500 card (high-end). The former beats the latter in most benchmarks - I'll let you work out the math.

      For Ati's high-end card, you need to move up to the 5970. The GTX295 doesn't look all that hot now, does it?

      Or maybe it does, if you take GTX295's power consumption into account. Literally.

      Face it, there's very little reason to go with Nvidia's previous generation cards with Ati's current generation in the wild now. The only nvidia cards I'd touch are their lowest end $30 chips and only for Linux HTPCs. For almost everything else, an Ati card is a better bet *right now*. (Maybe Fermi will change that, maybe not. Time will tell).
      dual chip based GTX295=micro stuttering

      Single chip 5870= no micro stuttering

      and yes 350 is very cheap... the highend fermi card will cost 500 and more.

      Comment


      • #53
        Why is getting an ATI card right now the better choice?

        Based on the assumption the improvement will be sufficient?

        I'm just curious. I don't own an ATI card that uses fglrx drivers or supported by some or a newer ATI card so I can only ask rather than go on experience.

        I do suggest, however, that Kano's opinion is more similar to those who post in distro-centric forums. I read few of the opposite or ATI 'fans' perspective. Some (I won't name, you can discover for yourself) state that recent ATI/fglrx drivers 'don't work at all' with the later kernels.

        Seems like strong words.

        If it's all based on assumptions on considerable improvement, then when because not everyone shares the idea of waiting for uncertain time frames.

        I'd still consider an ATI card but probably no more expensive than HD Radeon 4850 ($100).

        Comment


        • #54
          I think Q is saying that if you need high end performance then a single-GPU solution would be preferable to a dual-GPU solution with the same performance.

          That said, I don't see a clear benefit to buying a high-end card for a Linux consumer system right now so Q's statement, while probably correct, is mostly theoretical today.

          Comment


          • #55
            PW cracking using CUDA/OpenCL - best in a cluster

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by bridgman View Post
              I think Q is saying that if you need high end performance then a single-GPU solution would be preferable to a dual-GPU solution with the same performance.

              That said, I don't see a clear benefit to buying a high-end card for a Linux consumer system right now so Q's statement, while probably correct, is mostly theoretical today.
              For a typical home user, maybe not, but developers can always use the extra processing power. Then, there are also specialized uses like Kano's suggestion on PW cracking, or modeling/CAD-on-the-cheap that can appreciate the extra GPU grunt...

              But no, spending more than ~$100 is overkill just for browsing the net, watching movies and playing native Linux games. (Even a netbook can do those things, no need for a high-end graphics card!)

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by Panix View Post
                Why is getting an ATI card right now the better choice?

                Based on the assumption the improvement will be sufficient?

                I'm just curious. I don't own an ATI card that uses fglrx drivers or supported by some or a newer ATI card so I can only ask rather than go on experience.

                I do suggest, however, that Kano's opinion is more similar to those who post in distro-centric forums. I read few of the opposite or ATI 'fans' perspective. Some (I won't name, you can discover for yourself) state that recent ATI/fglrx drivers 'don't work at all' with the later kernels.

                Seems like strong words.

                If it's all based on assumptions on considerable improvement, then when because not everyone shares the idea of waiting for uncertain time frames.

                I'd still consider an ATI card but probably no more expensive than HD Radeon 4850 ($100).
                don't buy a 4850 this card is outdatet buy a 5750 100€ or a 56xx 70-80€..

                5xxx based cards give you a more OpenCL "power" and realy nice Tessellation..

                5xxx thanks to 40nm do have less power consuming and generall the idle consuming is very low.
                Last edited by Qaridarium; 01-02-2010, 02:03 AM.

                Comment


                • #58
                  Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                  I think Q is saying that if you need high end performance then a single-GPU solution would be preferable to a dual-GPU solution with the same performance.

                  That said, I don't see a clear benefit to buying a high-end card for a Linux consumer system right now so Q's statement, while probably correct, is mostly theoretical today.
                  thank you very much for explain my words.



                  "I don't see a clear benefit to buying a high-end card for a Linux consumer system right now "

                  really you are wrong i play farcry @ linux in wine... i play oblivion in wine i wana play ArmA2 in wine...........
                  and i wana play in superhigh all on max settings!
                  so you need a 3850++++++++ for farcry


                  and ArmA2 kills a 5870 to 4-8fps on all on max 10000m view all on superhigh and 8xSSAA!
                  you need to buy a CrossfireX 5890X2 for 1000 to play ArmA2! on 'windows'
                  ArmA2 on linux you need a R900-'2011' based Card i think...

                  you are right there is no need for highend-card for nativ-linux games...

                  but.... to play a highend windows game in wine you need a highend-card!

                  Wine=Highendcard
                  no wine= 40 card...

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    I guess we should agree on terminology here, particularly since GPUs are continuing to increase rapidly in power.

                    My feeling was that a Linux user would have trouble making full use of anything more than an HD4850 or HD57xx, even for the Windows games which ran on Wine today, so by "high end" I guess I meant HD4870, HD5850 or higher unless you have a really big screen. Maybe that is no longer the case ?
                    Last edited by bridgman; 01-02-2010, 04:20 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Anybody know how to disable wathermark on this hotfix?
                      I have one saying "Unsupported hardware" for my Mobility 4670 in MSI Gx 623

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X