Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Linux 3.13 Kernel Is A Must-Have For AMD RadeonSI Users

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by FourDMusic View Post
    Basically anything that uses Cairo, including GTK+, Mozilla, WebKit, Poppler, Gnuplot, Inkscape...

    Chris Wilson didn't waste his time without a reason.
    Thanks!
    So when I browse the internet, a new page would be drawn faster or when I paint in gimp / load a picture or load a pdf - all those stuff would be drawn and scrolled faster? interesting.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by FutureSuture View Post
      This guy on Reddit is getting 60+ frames per second with DOTA2 at maximum settings using radeonsi, kernel 3.13, and a HD 7770. I am so upgrading to AMD for open source goodness.
      I got 50-60 FPS on a 7850 with a 3.13 daily and oibaf's PPA on Ubuntu 13.10; fglrx seems to have a slightly higher average framerate though, but essentially, Dota 2 is fine with either driver.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by tomtomme View Post
        Huh? Then why is it benchmarked here so often?
        Michael benches a lot of stuff here that is of very questionable use.

        In which use cases is it really used if one uses say KDE, GNOME3, XFCE or Unity with compositing turned on?
        Are you saying it is only used for things like LXDE / compositing turned of?
        As mentioned, Cairo is probably the main user, which is built into a lot of GTK apps. Qt using the native drawing backend uses it as well. However, the compositors and desktops themselves are basically OpenGL based and don't use it at all. It's the apps themselves which use it.

        With Wayland, XRender will likely largely go away. XWayland apps will still use it, but native apps will probably just use standard OpenGL acceleration.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by rrohbeck
          I thought the newer Unigine demos need a newer OpenGL version than Mesa supplies but if you can fake it...
          Actually they only need some features from newer OpenGL versions and the required features happen to be implemented already and by "luck" it doesn't try to use anything that's not implemented yet.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by tomtomme View Post
            Thanks!
            So when I browse the internet, a new page would be drawn faster or when I paint in gimp / load a picture or load a pdf - all those stuff would be drawn and scrolled faster? interesting.
            That's my understanding of it. You're very welcome

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Espionage724 View Post
              I got 50-60 FPS on a 7850 with a 3.13 daily and oibaf's PPA on Ubuntu 13.10; fglrx seems to have a slightly higher average framerate though, but essentially, Dota 2 is fine with either driver.
              Thanks for the input. I do wonder, though; these are all 7000 series cards. What about the generation after that?

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by FutureSuture View Post
                Thanks for the input. I do wonder, though; these are all 7000 series cards. What about the generation after that?
                8000 and R7/R9 cards are all just rebadged off the same architecture. The newest chips are the Sea Islands/Hawaii parts. 7790/R9 290.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
                  8000 and R7/R9 cards are all just rebadged off the same architecture. The newest chips are the Sea Islands/Hawaii parts. 7790/R9 290.
                  So if I get a R9 290, I won't be seeing performance as good as the R9 270X with radeonsi?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by FutureSuture View Post
                    So if I get a R9 290, I won't be seeing performance as good as the R9 270X with radeonsi?
                    I think you will. There have been some bugfixes lately that applied just to the newer cards, but i think they are mostly working now and all the shader code generation seems to be pretty much the same.

                    I'd be more concerned about bugs than performance at this point.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by FutureSuture View Post
                      So if I get a R9 290, I won't be seeing performance as good as the R9 270X with radeonsi?
                      You *should*, at least soon. They are all GCN based and the derivations from the stock architecture aren't huge. My bigger question would be if radeon in Mesa will ever support TrueAudio.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by zanny View Post
                        You *should*, at least soon. They are all GCN based and the derivations from the stock architecture aren't huge. My bigger question would be if radeon in Mesa will ever support TrueAudio.
                        I had an idea the other day that was basically a VDPAU layer, but for dedicated audio hardware. Like just a thin wrapper layer that provides a common API and the wrapper would handle the differences between TrueAudio and any other available hardware blocks, just have the individual kernel pieces hook into it.

                        This is coming from someone who is NOT familiar with the layout and workings of TrueAudio and similar dedicated audio blocks, so if its not in the same design or style as video decoding blocks then just ignore me haha. The idea of it was just abstracting away the platform details so that we can just say "Oh you know you want dedicated video decoding? Just target VDPAU. Oh, YOU want dedicated audio handling? Target $Insert_Wrapper_Name"

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by sasy360 View Post
                          2D performace is very important even these days. And the current Glamor state with radesosi driver is total crap.
                          I didn't pay for some glued, genereic 2d driver BS. Definitely no more AMD graphics for me.
                          How is 2D performance with radeonsi vs fglrx?

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Espionage724 View Post
                            How is 2D performance with radeonsi vs fglrx?
                            http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTU3NTI

                            Short story, not great.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
                              As mentioned, Cairo is probably the main user, which is built into a lot of GTK apps. Qt using the native drawing backend uses it as well. However, the compositors and desktops themselves are basically OpenGL based and don't use it at all. It's the apps themselves which use it.

                              With Wayland, XRender will likely largely go away. XWayland apps will still use it, but native apps will probably just use standard OpenGL acceleration.
                              Xfwm with compositing uses XRender, I've heard from some Xfce developer.


                              Originally posted by FutureSuture View Post
                              So if I get a R9 290, I won't be seeing performance as good as the R9 270X with radeonsi?
                              The R9 290(X) should be avoided because:
                              - it is very noisy, hot and power hungry,
                              - regardless of graphics driver, on GNU/Linux it's much slower than on Windows. The Free (radeon) driver is a wreck on the R9 290(X) right now.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Calinou View Post
                                The R9 290(X) should be avoided because:
                                - it is very noisy, hot and power hungry,
                                The heat and noise issue is only true of the reference design, the custom designs which are now available have temps well under control and run almost inaudibly (unless over-clocked significantly). The power usage is slightly higher that the equivalent Nvidia cards when running flat out however lower when the monitor is off so overall your costs will vary depending on if you leave your PC on while not in use and how much of your on-line time you spend gaming.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X