Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Radeon Gallium3D Starting To Out-Run Catalyst In Some Cases

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

  • #31
    THX open source radeon driver team !

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Sonadow View Post
      RadeonSI and Northern Islands comparison or this benchmark is useless.

      No sane person uses a 4xxx series on a desktop anymore. Except for old fogies who are too cheap to upgrade their hardware.
      ROFL. So which card would you suggest as replacement? In the case you didn't know, the 4850-70 can easily keep up with a 7750.

      If I was into conspiracy theories I'd even suspect that AMD is trying to kill the 48XX on purpose by dropping driver support, because it is so good even after 4 fsckin years.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by log0 View Post
        ROFL. So which card would you suggest as replacement? In the case you didn't know, the 4850-70 can easily keep up with a 7750.
        the HD 7970 x2, of course. And see how the open RadeonSI driver fails miserably.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Sonadow View Post
          the HD 7970 x2, of course. And see how the open RadeonSI driver fails miserably.
          And what do I need the 7970x2 for? E-penis comparisons with some teens? Sorry, I am out of that age. And the 4850 runs even recent games just fine.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by log0 View Post
            And the 4850 runs even recent games just fine.
            So by your logic the whole world should just stick to obsolete hardware like Intel's integrated GMA 950 graphics core because it's capable of running Windows 7's Aero, Windows 8's desktop effects, Compiz and the built-in compositors + desktop effects found in the latest versions of KDE and Gnome even though it's more than 5 years old.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Sonadow View Post
              So by your logic the whole world should just stick to obsolete hardware like Intel's integrated GMA 950 graphics core because it's capable of running Windows 7's Aero, Windows 8's desktop effects, Compiz and the built-in compositors + desktop effects found in the latest versions of KDE and Gnome even though it's more than 5 years old.
              So by your logic, the whole world should just buy new hardware when they do not actually need to?

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by j2723 View Post
                So by your logic, the whole world should just buy new hardware when they do not actually need to?
                Yes.

                Because of obsolescence and EOL status.

                In fact, let's take it one step further. Why even upgrade your OS? Let's all stick with Ubuntu 7.04 and all other distros' equivalents at that level since nobody needs to use GTK3 and QT4 and the latest additions to the GCC compiler and the glibc / libstdc++ libraries. GTK2, QT3 and old versions of GCC and the C libraries can still compile most of today's open source software, so why bother upgrading to newer libraries that nobody needs?
                Last edited by Sonadow; 02-13-2013, 10:16 AM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Sonadow View Post
                  Yes.

                  Because of obsolescence and EOL status.

                  In fact, let's take it one step further. Why even upgrade your OS? Let's all stick with Ubuntu 7.04 and all other distros' equivalents at that level since nobody needs to use GTK3 and QT4 and the latest additions to the GCC compiler and the glibc / glibc++ libraries.
                  Apples and Oranges.
                  Hardware costs money to upgrade, software upgrades are free.

                  I have nothing to lose when I upgrade my software (other than stability, in the worst case), I do however, lose money by upgrading my hardware, therefore I must first look to see if it is "worth" upgrading. If my "obsolete" hardware can do the work just fine, why should I waste my money.

                  EDIT:
                  By the way, the same thing can apply to proprietary software, take for instance Photoshop, why upgrade from CS4 to CS5 when CS4 can do everything you need to be able to do? I am mainly talking about FOSS, however.
                  Last edited by j2723; 02-13-2013, 10:23 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by j2723 View Post
                    Apples and Oranges.
                    Hardware costs money to upgrade, software upgrades are free.

                    I have nothing to lose when I upgrade my software (other than stability, in the worst case), I do however, lose money by upgrading my hardware, therefore I must first look to see if it is "worth" upgrading. If my "obsolete" hardware can do the work just fine, why should I waste my money?
                    And if 1 day all the Linux distros in the world decide to charge for software upgrades, it's curtains.

                    And software upgrades are never free. Red Hat charges for upgrades. Microsoft and Apple charge for upgrades. Oracle and IBM charge for upgrades. SAP charges for upgrades. So you telling me that server admins running Red Hat / Microsoft servers loaded with Oracle / IBM / SAP applications should never upgrade their systems because their software updates are not free.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Sonadow View Post
                      So by your logic the whole world should just stick to obsolete hardware like Intel's integrated GMA 950 graphics core because it's capable of running Windows 7's Aero, Windows 8's desktop effects, Compiz and the built-in compositors + desktop effects found in the latest versions of KDE and Gnome even though it's more than 5 years old.
                      Nice attempt at trolling... We mention high-end HD3xxxx and HD4xxx are still perfectly capable and you compare this to GMA950, a far older low-end solution...

                      Just admit that you are wrong and everything you say is BS and just move on...

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X