Originally posted by lordmozilla
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
AMD AM2 processor Motherboard that works with Linux?
Collapse
X
-
I'm running a DFI LANParty DK 790GX-M2RS and haven't had any major issues. I initially had a problem with my fresh Lenny installation improperly naming the boot HD, but a) that was easily fixed in Grub, and b) I don't have the technical knowledge to say for sure that it was a hardware incompatibility issue.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Melcar View PostOnly real downsides to them are rather lackluster SATA performance (USB speeds aren't that great either).
Comment
-
Well I have a SB600 a.t.m. and it's working fine. But I'm not exactly sure which Kernel (gentoo) I started, it was probably .26 series.
The .28 is running fine and I didn't find any issues.
Can't judge about speed but since I came from an USB 1.1 system everything USB 2 is striking fast.
SATA doesn't seem to be slow, too. But all my older stuff was PATA (UDMA 100) so...Stop TCPA, stupid software patents and corrupt politicians!
Comment
-
There are a few benchies on PTS Global comparing SB600 SATA performance to a competing nvidia chip (or I can run one right now if anyone bothers to compare). It's not good; not a slaughter, but definately not good. SB750 is no better either. This is under both Linux and Windows, so it's a hardware fault rather than an OS compatibility issue.
As for the kernels, I think it was the .24s that had problems with some boards and the disk controllers. The guys in the kernel bug tracker were cool enough to provide me with a fix which they then build into latter kernel revisions. Kernels .25 and newer should work with no issues.
Comment
-
Does anybody know then how good nvidia is giving support/specs to the kernel developers? I mean we all know about that nvidia graphic card situation and in compariosn AMD-ATI giving full specs (though the nv-binaries aren't really bad).
So what about the chipsets then? I never had an nvidia chipset (all mine were either amd, intel and most of them probably via) so I don't know. I see the options in Kernel config but no practical experience.
And can [i]one{/i] single review/comparison be the high wisdom? I'd consider using more sources for building an opinion, even when it is Phoronix.
And I'll have the joy to work with a SB750 probably next week. I'll see what happens. As long as all of it runs and performance ain't sub level 0 it's fine for me. Moreover these new chipsets are to suck up just about 10 W which is a nice thing for me. Don't know about nvidia's chipsets though.Stop TCPA, stupid software patents and corrupt politicians!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adarion View PostDoes anybody know then how good nvidia is giving support/specs to the kernel developers? I mean we all know about that nvidia graphic card situation and in compariosn AMD-ATI giving full specs (though the nv-binaries aren't really bad).
So what about the chipsets then? I never had an nvidia chipset (all mine were either amd, intel and most of them probably via) so I don't know. I see the options in Kernel config but no practical experience.
And can [i]one{/i] single review/comparison be the high wisdom? I'd consider using more sources for building an opinion, even when it is Phoronix.
And I'll have the joy to work with a SB750 probably next week. I'll see what happens. As long as all of it runs and performance ain't sub level 0 it's fine for me. Moreover these new chipsets are to suck up just about 10 W which is a nice thing for me. Don't know about nvidia's chipsets though.
That being all said, perhaps the SB800 southbridge should improve things. On paper at least it looks like a winner and should finally fix some long outstanding issues with the ati chipsets.Last edited by deanjo; 12 March 2009, 07:55 PM.
Comment
-
SATA perf
Originally posted by Melcar View PostThere are a few benchies on PTS Global comparing SB600 SATA performance to a competing nvidia chip (or I can run one right now if anyone bothers to compare). It's not good; not a slaughter, but definately not good. SB750 is no better either. This is under both Linux and Windows, so it's a hardware fault rather than an OS compatibility issue.
My current system is I think SB700 based (Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H), and it seems to have better SATA disk I/O performance than any other desktop system I've ever used (hdparm -t says around 120 MB/s, and disk-intensive operations also "feel" very fast)... in my case at least I suspect it's the disk that's the limiting factor.
Comment
Comment