Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Radeon Gallium3D Gets Important Cayman Fixes

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

  • #11
    You guys, don't forget that Evergreen is affected too. It's what my laptop is using and none of the recent Catalyst releases want to touch my hybrid graphics.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by Michael Larabel
      So if you're an owner of a AMD Radeon HD 6900 series graphics card, MSAA should work better. However, if you're using such a high-end graphics card with the open-source driver stack at this point, it's rather silly and can find much better performance out of using the AMD Catalyst binary driver to exploit the full potential out of the pricey hardware.
      Sorry, this is outright lie. HD58xx-68xx-69xx run 85%-100% performance with opensource driver. I use HD5850 and mobility HD3870 with opensource driver and performance is very good.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by brosis View Post
        Sorry, this is outright lie. HD58xx-68xx-69xx run 85%-100% performance with opensource driver. I use HD5850 and mobility HD3870 with opensource driver and performance is very good.
        Well, this http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ia_15way&num=1 doesn't show exactly 85-100% on some tests.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by Drago View Post
          Well, this http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ia_15way&num=1 doesn't show exactly 100%.
          That article is outdated, look here: http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTM2NzM
          And for real-world performance compare Unigine tests on same hardware here: http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...FO-57500792103
          and here (openarena, xonotic) http://openbenchmarking.org/index.ph...FO-57500792103
          Last edited by brosis; 05-16-2013, 05:31 AM.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by brosis View Post
            That article is outdated, look here: http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTM2NzM
            And for real-world performance compare Unigine tests on same hardware here: http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...FO-57500792103
            and here (openarena, xonotic) http://openbenchmarking.org/index.ph...FO-57500792103
            Yeah performance of the oss driver is pretty good at least if your hardware can use r600g. It's still incomplete for sure and it definitely needs power management ASAP. But it is overall far better than catalyst.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by brosis View Post
              And for real-world performance compare Unigine tests on same hardware here: http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...FO-57500792103
              The 2 valid Unigine tests show 70-80%, which is pretty good. Throw out the Heaven results, because fglrx is doing tesselation that the OSS drivers don't support yet, so it's not comparable.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
                The 2 valid Unigine tests show 70-80%, which is pretty good. Throw out the Heaven results, because fglrx is doing tesselation that the OSS drivers don't support yet, so it's not comparable.
                Alternatively, throw out the OSS drivers because they don't support a 3+ year-old core feature of modern graphics hardware/API. It's all relative to what your needs are. It'd be awesome if one option covered all needs, that would be great, but as it is, one driver serves one set of users better than the other. Which driver that is depends on context.

                Comment


                • #18
                  On a A8-5500 (7560D igp) the fglrx driver works perfectly well with xfce (i have it since Christmas and had no crashes or anything, i played all sorts of stuff on it, including Steam games). The CPU reports lower temperatures too. I dont see whats the big issue is with it. It even has working hw decoding via xvba with Xbmc. Suspend is working (not that i use it much, the rig is up 24/7).

                  I did try the radeon driver but it is slower and incomplete compared to fglrx. Granted i have Debians built in 8.0.5 mesa. I wait for 9.2 or newer mesa build since for some reason the current dev libs prevent the compilation of recent libmesa (nouveau's libs report some old version or something). Anyway until proper power management is in the driver, i dont really itch to use it.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Thank you, that was very well put. I personally can appreciate an honest evaluation based on experience. It's refreshing to see that some people still think that way.

                    EDIT: You need to have a pretty recent graphics stack all built from recent git from top to bottom of the stack to get all the cool OSS experience. It's improved tremendously in recent months. Still it doesnt have proper power management . I guess it's pending. Pending what? I give up.
                    Last edited by duby229; 05-18-2013, 07:23 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by elanthis View Post
                      Alternatively, throw out the OSS drivers because they don't support a 3+ year-old core feature of modern graphics hardware/API. It's all relative to what your needs are. It'd be awesome if one option covered all needs, that would be great, but as it is, one driver serves one set of users better than the other. Which driver that is depends on context.
                      Yes, exactly. Throw out a perfectly good set of drivers, which run virtually everything ever created for the Linux platform because they don't support a gaming feature only used in a tech demo benchmark.

                      That's the reasonable thing to do. If you mentioned dynamic powersaving, I'd follow you, but tesselation?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X