Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Radeon HD 7950 Launches, Linux Support Questionable

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

  • Radeon HD 7950 Launches, Linux Support Questionable

    Phoronix: Radeon HD 7950 Launches, Linux Support Questionable

    AMD released the Radeon HD 7950 today as the second "Southern Islands" graphics card following the release of the Radeon HD 7970 one month ago, but how is the Linux support for the new AMD Radeon GPUs?..

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTA1MTI

  • #2
    Looking over the reviews, it was comforting to note that the performance of the 7950 scaled down fairly linearly when compared to the 7970. The gap between the two GPUs did not appear to be that large, so it makes sense for fixed-budget consumers to give it consideration.

    That said: Outside of limited applications (GPGPU, CAD, Game development, etc), I find that it is difficult to justify the 79XX's expense for PC gaming. You can purchase both an Xbox-360 and a PS3 for the same price. Those of us with a 4-year procurement cycle may be better off purchasing ATI's $140 (6790/6858) offering each year, unless purchasing an integrated machine (iMac).

    I'd love to see a recreational gamer's justification for purchasing a $500 video card. I could see flush die-hard MMORPG fans (EvE/WoW) wanting whatever gives them the greatest level of immersion, but that's about it.

    F

    Comment


    • #3
      The 7970 set new records in Bitcoin mining efficiency https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=57410.0 Depending on how much electricity costs where you live, it might pay off to upgrade.

      Also the 7970&7950 are the only single-GPU solutions which are adequate for moderately demanding games at triple-monitor resolutions. Before that you would have to put up with SLI/CrossFire with all its downsides.

      Comment


      • #4
        @bridgeman

        why dont send me a card for free, would like to test it on my own. you can be sure you will know the bugs first then

        Comment


        • #5
          Um...

          Originally posted by russofris View Post
          Outside of limited applications (GPGPU, CAD, Game development, etc), I find that it is difficult to justify the 79XX's expense for PC gaming. You can purchase both an Xbox-360 and a PS3 for the same price. Those of us with a 4-year procurement cycle may be better off purchasing ATI's $140 (6790/6858) offering each year, unless purchasing an integrated machine (iMac).

          I'd love to see a recreational gamer's justification for purchasing a $500 video card. I could see flush die-hard MMORPG fans (EvE/WoW) wanting whatever gives them the greatest level of immersion, but that's about it.
          I'm not much of a PC gamer (I stick to Wii/360, mostly) but you do realize how old current-gen consoles are? The Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 can only output a native 1280x720p resolution, and most games are locked at 30FPS. Yes, they *can* upscale to 1080p, and some games *can* run at 60FPS, but these settings are rarely used.

          If you run demanding games on a 2560x1600p monitor, these state-of-the-art GPUs are fully justified. 1600p is twice the resolution of 1080p, and more than quadruple that of 720p. Games like Crysis, Metro, Battlefield 3, Shogun 2, Dirt 3, Batman: Arkham City, etc., will easily crush mid-range graphics cards when played at top settings. Heck, even the HD 7970 still gets hammered by a few games like Metro unless it's Crossfired. (in which, you're now paying for *two* cards, or more)

          I'm not a participant in the idiotic PC-vs-Console wars, but these cards have their purpose if you're trying to max out your gaming experience. But if you game at only 1920x1080p and aren't playing the most demanding games (or, are comfortable with their lower settings) an HD 6870 is still great.

          If you're really on a 4-year upgrade cycle, then I'd suggest going for a mid-range CPU and top-end GPU each time. I think you'll get more of your money's worth that way. In any case, I expect the price on the HD 7970 to drop substantially once Nvidia's 6XX series comes out (whenever that happens).

          Me? I play mostly Sonic and Zelda, so I don't need a monster PC.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Pyre Vulpimorph View Post
            1600p is twice the resolution of 1080p, and more than quadruple that of 720p. Games like Crysis, Metro, Battlefield 3, Shogun 2, Dirt 3, Batman: Arkham City, etc., will easily crush mid-range graphics cards when played at top settings. Heck, even the HD 7970 still gets hammered by a few games like Metro unless it's Crossfired. (in which, you're now paying for *two* cards, or more)
            Both Metro and Crysis need two HD7970 to play at highest quality @2560x1600
            ## VGA ##
            AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
            Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Pyre Vulpimorph View Post
              I'm not much of a PC gamer (I stick to Wii/360, mostly) but you do realize how old current-gen consoles are? The Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 can only output a native 1280x720p resolution, and most games are locked at 30FPS. Yes, they *can* upscale to 1080p, and some games *can* run at 60FPS, but these settings are rarely used.
              I had always assumed that what consoles lacked in resolution was made up for in scene complexity. I do understand that the gap is growing now that we're 4-5 years into each consoles lifecycle, but I've seen side-by-side comparisons (most recently with Skyrim), and the XBOX didn't look 'that' bad. It definitely did not look bad enough to make me want to spend $500 to upgrade my 5770. I'll DL the Battlefield 3 demo on PS3 today to make sure I'm not lying.

              Originally posted by Pyre Vulpimorph View Post
              If you run demanding games on a 2560x1600p monitor, these state-of-the-art GPUs are fully justified.
              Indeed. A gen2k graphics card is necessary to run gen2k games. I do wonder if most users could simply get away with a second Gen1k card in crossfire/SLI (a second 5770 for example). That would leave them with $350 for hookers and blow. I'll see if the BM sites have a direct comparison, or if I can coax the data I need out of openbenchmark.

              F

              Comment


              • #8
                Just confirmed that 2x 5770s run "most games" approximately 10% slower than a single 7970, or roughly the equivalent of a single 7950.

                The up side of this is that current 5770 owners have a $120 upgrade path
                The down side is that these owners will have to deal with Crossfire's prerequisites (power, free slot, etc) and "quirks".

                Lastly, 2x5770s give you roughly half the performance of 2x 79xx cards, though it appears that it will still run most games at 20x16 with 4xAA and 4xAF @~30fps.

                I guess I'll end up with a 79XX if they're available in the 2012 iMac.

                F

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by russofris View Post
                  Just confirmed that 2x 5770s run "most games" approximately 10% slower than a single 7970, or roughly the equivalent of a single 7950.
                  When did you try HD79XX last time? An HD7950 with the latest driver release is already faster than an HD7970 with the previous drivers. It is a new architecture and it still has a good margin of increase with new drivers.
                  ## VGA ##
                  AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
                  Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    AMD
                    Please get your driver to provide proper support!
                    I can't believe it's possible to ship drivers with broken OpenCL support, or GLSL previously. They can't be taken seriously. (banging my head against the wall...)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
                      When did you try HD79XX last time?
                      An abundance of benchmark information exists for both setups, with fairly similar platforms. I found that the difficulty in comparing was to find matching games. A lot of 5770 benchmarks were done with crisis, most 79XX benchmarks were done with crisis 2, and so on. I assure you that in instances where 2X5770s are running the same games as a 7970, the difference in performance was usually within 10%.

                      That said, there were a number of instances where the 7970 dominated due to SLI quirks.

                      I'm not saying that 2X5770's are better than a 7970. I'm simply pointing out that (for games on a system that meets SLIs's prereqs) adding a second 5770 is a viable and much cheaper option that will enable users to run res2k games in the short term.


                      Re: New 79XX drivers are faster now:
                      As are the 5770 drivers.

                      Is there a chart somewhere to show what asymmetric SLI setups will actually work? I know that you can combine stuff from the same generation (A8/A6 and 5770, 5750 and 5770), but can you combine a 5770 with a 6950 or 7950?

                      F

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by russofris View Post
                        adding a second 5770 is a viable and much cheaper option
                        be sure no linux user care for a crossfire solution because the usability of the FGLRX is very bad in this kind of usage. and the Opensource driver do not have any support for crossfire.

                        in my point of view crossfire is windows only.

                        and another fact: the most linux users i know spend more money on hardware than windows users.

                        for example i know a lot windows XP-32bit users they do not have need for more than 4gb ram. but ram only cost 4 per 1gb and linux users trent to have 16gb ram and more.
                        also windows users (gamers) buy an FX4170 (4,2ghz) because single threated speed
                        most linux users buy 8core-16core and more cores.

                        Linux users are completely computer addicted nerds/geeks.

                        this means: no they don't care about money.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Ehm... that's simply completely wrong, really.
                          ## VGA ##
                          AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
                          Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Qar, again, your ability to troll has always impressed me. Bravo on yet another masterpiece.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X