Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

x1950 xtx with r300g driver, how good for gaming?

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

  • x1950 xtx with r300g driver, how good for gaming?

    I'm fairly happy with my 4200 igp with the open drivers, as I don't game much, and was willing to wait for the r700 drivers to mature before looking for a new card to drop in, but I've come across an offer for an x1950 xtx for a very reasonable sum, so...

    Would it be worth it, or would I be better off waiting?

    How good is the r300g driver currently with games, particularly under wine?
    I've seen suggestions that wine really needs opengl 3 compatible drivers to work at it's best, is this accurate?
    Is it at least possible that wine under the r300g driver would be less "flaky" than under fglrx, even if there is a performance hit?

    I'm quite happy to pull in various components from git and what not, I'm just hoping to hear some experiences from others wrt gaming under r300g, particularly with wine.

  • #2
    Nope, wine and r300g don't seem to get along very well, for now at least. Even Warcraft III (which used to work fine with classic mesa) is slow as molasses with r300g.

    Comment


    • #3
      Agreed - r300g is slow here too.

      Originally posted by Zhick View Post
      Nope, wine and r300g don't seem to get along very well, for now at least. Even Warcraft III (which used to work fine with classic mesa) is slow as molasses with r300g.
      Some people report good performance with r300g, whereas others run back to classic Mesa instead. So the interesting question becomes "Why does r300g run slowly on some systems?".

      The current theory I've heard is that it's AGP related, which would certainly be relevant to my case. Is your hardware AGP too?

      Comment


      • #4
        Nah, generally r300g is faster than classic for me. It's just not fast in wine.
        My card is PCIE btw.

        Comment


        • #5
          It depends. Classic is much more faster and compatible in UMS than Classic and Gallium in KMS.

          but using d-r-t and master Mesa/DDX you can get pageflip(works only in Gallium mode, with Classic apps can be unstable) on r500 cards and finally working DynPM, so I switched to KMS/Gallium, and inly relods into UMS when play Deathkartz and othe Glide games under Wine.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by evil_core View Post
            It depends. Classic is much more faster and compatible in UMS than Classic and Gallium in KMS.

            but using d-r-t and master Mesa/DDX you can get pageflip(works only in Gallium mode, with Classic apps can be unstable) on r500 cards and finally working DynPM, so I switched to KMS/Gallium, and inly relods into UMS when play Deathkartz and othe Glide games under Wine.
            There is no pageflipping support yet for dri2 on radeon hardware.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by agd5f View Post
              There is no pageflipping support yet for dri2 on radeon hardware.
              There is, and only on DRI2/KMS, glisse backported it from Intel code, were patches on dri-devel and later it was merged upstream (in d-r-t and master xf86-video-ati. Look at 30591320ec46e491ba20904cc64f3405b51c6505 commit in DDX.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by evil_core View Post
                There is, and only on DRI2/KMS, glisse backported it from Intel code, were patches on dri-devel and later it was merged upstream (in d-r-t and master xf86-video-ati. Look at 30591320ec46e491ba20904cc64f3405b51c6505 commit in DDX.
                It only implement the MSC API infrastructure. That doesn't implement pageflipping yet, it still does back to front blits.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Zhick View Post
                  Nah, generally r300g is faster than classic for me. It's just not fast in wine.
                  My card is PCIE btw.
                  If there's something slow in mesa/r300g when running wine, I think it can be tracked down. There is a chance we will investigate the issue if the application you run under wine is available for free. Feel free to file a bug and attach the link to the free game/demo/app you have problems with. We can't fix something we don't know about.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Is sauerbraten locking up a know issue or should I open a new bug?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It's a known issue but you can open a new bug anyway.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Just to add my experiences, I've got an r300 core IGP (Radeon Xpress 1150). The Gallium3D driver is a tiny bit faster under Wine.

                        I tested with Half-Life2 with the -dxlevel 70 flag, since it won't with anything higher. In a particular spot:
                        Classic mesa gives about 17fps.
                        Gallium3D gives about 19fps.
                        It's a small difference, but it is faster.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          WINE seems to work fine with Gallium. I got a RS480 with me and can play Temple of Elemental Evil; it's not fast (need to turn off everything and/or set it to low, and use the lowest resolution available), but playable. Tried the Age of Decadence demo too and it also works with no errors.
                          Gallium doesn't seem to be any faster under WINE than classic mesa. Some native games do seem to be faster (Nexuiz, Open Arena, Astromenace).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Melcar View Post
                            WINE seems to work fine with Gallium. I got a RS480 with me ...
                            Same here, RS480.

                            As of the last few updates, the Gallium driver seems to work at least the same, sometimes a fraction faster than the classic driver.
                            I can't really comment on Gallium VS FGLRX. Haven't been able to use catalyst since 9.3.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Thanks for all the replies to this, I was really more curious as to "how well" games in wine would work with the gallium driver compared to classic mesa rather than "how fast", but what you've given me is enough to make me at least give the x1950 xtx a shot (EUR40 seems reasonable for a new one, right?).

                              A couple of questions though;
                              I got my hands on an old x1950 pro agp card to test it out for myself since I last posted, however I ran into a couple of issues, highlighted here.

                              Is this terrible performance with kms and agp cards the norm? (~300fps in glxgears, but desktop is unusable)
                              I tried the airlied's "drm-for-2.6.35" kernel, but it was no different than a 2.6.32 kernel, even though it looks like numerous agp fixes went in to that tree.

                              Anyone else see that "undefined symbol: _glapi_get_proc_address)" problem?
                              Probably just something screwy on my end...

                              Even though it's unusable, with the gallium driver glxinfo does report the following;
                              Code:
                              OpenGL renderer string: Gallium 0.4 on RV570
                              OpenGL version string: 2.1 Mesa 7.9-devel
                              OpenGL shading language version string: 1.20
                              However, isn't r500 hardware limited to opengl 2.0 with GLSL 1.1?

                              One thing that did work well for me though was the i2c hwmon support, with the (slighty patched) lm63 driver I was able to get two temperate readings as well as the fans' current pwm value in conky, very nice!
                              I know this is utterly dependent on the sensor chip used, but do they all report the pwm value, or has anyone seen any that report the fans actual rpm?

                              Anyways, thanks again for all the replies.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X