Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

VIA Keeps Trying For Kernel Inclusion Of Its DRM

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Duhorigh73 View Post
    If youre trying to do photo editing, dont go with VIA. Not enough horsepower, for that matter as someone already said it may not have enough power for HD playback even.
    What graphics card can accelerate photo editing and in what way? I dont think that is possible unless you do a GP-GPU thingy (image processing is a rather ordinary computing task).

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by misiu_mp View Post
      What graphics card can accelerate photo editing and in what way? I dont think that is possible unless you do a GP-GPU thingy (image processing is a rather ordinary computing task).
      Yeah, but until the Nano, they had sub-par FPU performance and the CPU compared favorably to a comparably clocked PIII. It wasn't P-IV class, even with the C7. The main compelling thing with VIA's prior to Nano CPUs was that they way outperformed any of the other low-power X86 solutions (In performance per watt- and in some cases TDP even...)- and they were "good enough" for many applications. I've had several in the past and they were nice- but I got tired of the red-headed stepchild treatment we kept seeming to get from them. They kept acting like they liked Linux and then would change their minds. So, I quit using my EPIA machines as while they were great on power consumption, they just didn't have what it took overall for performance.

      Comment


      • #18
        Well, maybe Inkscape could make use of OpenVG and I guess you need some 2d acc. for scrolling, since you will see a difference in VESA driver plus e.g. browser scrolling and a "real" driver plus brwoser scrolling.
        Not sure about GIMP being able to make use of any GPU stuff for image editing though.

        Well, since I still have my Laptop with a C3-2 + CLE266 GPU and a small tower with C7 Eden and CN700 GPU I still use that stuff but working with my AMDs is far more fun cause it just works better. And in terms of power consumption / raw-computing-power-to-consumption-ratio VIA is in high danger being overrun by intel/amd.

        Comment


        • #19
          Now you start talking about their cpu's. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with them. They are low performance and so are comparable solutions from the competitors (good luck doing image editing on an atom). Low power CPU's are not meant to do this kind of jobs. It could be arguable whether their performance/watt ratio on the cpu is still so competitive, but this thread was about their GPU's, so lets not get into that.
          BTW Svartalf, clock-by-clock PIII was much better than PIV (Netburst was designed to be high clock and low performance per clock; it was a marketing move, remember?).

          Comment


          • #20
            Did anybody notice that a combination of VIA Nano and NV Ion (2) is the only way for NV to stay in the x86 netbook business for 2010? As NV has got only a licence for fsb powered systems that would be the logical way to go around this issue as Atom N450+ will not run with old Ion. When you think of VIA, then they would certainly perfer to sell plattform solutions with own chipsets. But then they should be really good and provide all features you want to have by a current system. Even when the drm bits are in the kernel, who says that the rest is ready for prime time. Before Nano the cpu speed was so EXTREMELY slow that even starting firefox took ages. I don't own such a device, but what i saw via vnc was really enough.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by misiu_mp View Post
              Now you start talking about their cpu's. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with them. They are low performance and so are comparable solutions from the competitors (good luck doing image editing on an atom). Low power CPU's are not meant to do this kind of jobs. It could be arguable whether their performance/watt ratio on the cpu is still so competitive, but this thread was about their GPU's, so lets not get into that.
              BTW Svartalf, clock-by-clock PIII was much better than PIV (Netburst was designed to be high clock and low performance per clock; it was a marketing move, remember?).
              There is that...

              However, it should be observed that they didn't do QUITE as well as the PIII Celerons at the same clocking. Their original main claim to fame was roughly 1/2-2/3rds the integer performance of a comparable PIII Celeron with vastly less power consumption- while all the other low-power solutions were in the 486 classes of performance.

              People kept looking for miracles out of the things, even VIA, if you want the truth of it. The Nano's the first one that might be close to living up to their hype on the part.

              Comment

              Working...
              X