Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Catalyst Linux 12.6 Beta Has Arrived

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
    Exactly. It is not the GPU, it is the CPU that is 15-20C more heat. If you or your company can solve that I will stop complaining.
    Is it possible a GPU fan isn't running or the GPU is producing the extra heat, and just happens to show up on the CPU because of the way your machine is blowing it around?

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
      Is it possible a GPU fan isn't running or the GPU is producing the extra heat, and just happens to show up on the CPU because of the way your machine is blowing it around?
      No, there is no extra fan for the GPU in this laptop.

      Comment


      • #33
        I have a laptop with 4670hd, I trid today last git radeon drivers with last xorg and last kernel. It works like a charm but it overheats a lot ! I also get 10 -15 degrees more even on idle ...

        And all of this even if I have tweaked my xorg and put the "low" profile for power management. I think these radeon drivers are just not ready for laptops. My battery time is half with radeon drivers compared to catalyst..

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Morgan00 View Post
          And all of this even if I have tweaked my xorg and put the "low" profile for power management. I think these radeon drivers are just not ready for laptops. My battery time is half with radeon drivers compared to catalyst..
          You can't set profiles in the xorg conf; are you sure you are following :

          http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature/...gement_Options

          ie :

          - check to make sure the /sys paths mentioned below are present and tweak the commands if necessary
          - echo "profile" to /sys/class/drm/card0/device/power_method
          - echo "low" or "mid" to /sys/class/drm/card0/device/power_profile

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by bridgman View Post
            You can't set profiles in the xorg conf; are you sure you are following :

            http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature/...gement_Options

            ie :

            - check to make sure the /sys paths mentioned below are present and tweak the commands if necessary
            - echo "profile" to /sys/class/drm/card0/device/power_method
            - echo "low" or "mid" to /sys/class/drm/card0/device/power_profile
            just tell me why not just fix the dynamic automatic power managment in the radeon driver?

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
              just tell me why not just fix the dynamic automatic power managment in the radeon driver?
              It's just not THAT easy to do, is it? I hope that it will be taken care of when the RadeonSI driver is brought up to other Radeon drivers' level.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                You can't set profiles in the xorg conf; are you sure you are following :

                http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature/...gement_Options

                ie :

                - check to make sure the /sys paths mentioned below are present and tweak the commands if necessary
                - echo "profile" to /sys/class/drm/card0/device/power_method
                - echo "low" or "mid" to /sys/class/drm/card0/device/power_profile
                That is what I do, use "low", but still only get an hour +, instead of two and a half with fglrx

                Comment


                • #38
                  same for me.. the clock rates is low according to "low profile" but it overheats still a lot..!

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Just checking...

                    When you guys talk about "overheating", do you actually mean the machine shuts down because the temp exceeds a threshold, or is the laptop simply hotter but otherwise functional?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      no shutdown. but not really functionnal for a laptop which has (with FOSS driver) half time battery and 10-15 degrees Celcius more on idle than Catalyst driver :/

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Kano
                        Verified that weird crash on debian wheezy with xserver 1.12.0, 1.12.1, 1.12.1.902. As it was a beta, i want a 2nd one...
                        Installed on my Debian SID, also upgraded the xserver to 1.12.902 on the upgrade and fglrx doesn't work. It keeps with a cursor blinking after gdm3 load, and in the xorg log file it apears "no free vt" error. Is that the crash do you say?

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Gusar View Post
                          Just checking...

                          When you guys talk about "overheating", do you actually mean the machine shuts down because the temp exceeds a threshold, or is the laptop simply hotter but otherwise functional?
                          Depends on what you call functional. With the fglrx drivers I usually have about 45C CPU temperature on idle and about 65-70C under heavy load. With the radeon drivers I get 60C minimum and under heavy load the CPU goes up to 85-90C. This does not shut down the system, but it is not healthy at all, so I wouldn't call that functional.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            The radeond driver is very problematic, first of all the temperature is very high than the binary driver, I get 92 degrees with my laptop hp pavilion dv6 2120, but when I use catalyst driver I get 71/82 degrees. The second problem is that the driver radeon don't had a video aceleration like xvba-video, For me that I have an amd x2 is impossible to watch a movie 1080p with the radeon driver

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              @Khudsa

                              You see a bit more in the log file, but the result is of course no X running. I installed a 32 bit system to compare and there X starts with xserver 1.12. I want a new beta with debian 64 bit support, kernel 3.4/3.5 support and maybe with dx10 hardware pci ids... btw. in the debian fglrx packaging a valid signature file was added, so when you run a 32 bit system you will not see a testing watermark. The problematic part is still that sometimes the control file is only for consumer hardware but not for the workstation (firegl) ones. I can accept a whitelist which is exactly the same for the fglrx kernel module for amdcccle and the (useless) control file but not when there are only a subset of the ids. The driver is generic by nature, it usually works even when amd did not test it - and when they tested it it does not mean that the driver is bug free anyway. So just an extra annoying thing than something useful. No win user ever saw a watermark with a beta driver, there even those drivers are promoted in

                              http://twitter.com/#!/catalystcreator

                              i think it was the first time that the linux driver link was on the same beta page, usually they called it hotfix for whatever.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                I want that driver too Kano, an xserver 1.12, amd64 compatible one...

                                By the way, the error I say is this:

                                Code:
                                Fatal server error:
                                [    80.563] xf86OpenConsole: Cannot find a free VT

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X