Cabbages and Kings

[Melcar]

I don't see what's the problem here. Bridgman already stated the method the driver follows; developed following the standards set out by the API, with further tunning and bug fixing done as issues are uncovered. Isn't that how things usually go? Bugs will appear after the fact. Individual programs and application change over time and inevitably something will break and/or not work as intended anymore.
As for (3D) performance, I don't see what the big fuss is about. Fglrx is usually on par with the Windows driver in this regard, with individual applications exhibiting issues here and there (ex. WINE, which is not really a performance issue). The driver is currently going over some significant changes in Composite support, which for the mean time means crappy Compiz/Kwin performance; these issues will eventually be ironed out.

[bridgman]

Which still requires Linux programmers wasting there time on a dead end project that doesnt work and never will. Which brings me back to my question...

Just so I understand... are you saying that this approach isn't working for NVidia either ?

[duby229]

I don't see what's the problem here. Bridgman already stated the method the driver follows; developed following the standards set out by the API, with further tunning and bug fixing done as issues are uncovered. Isn't that how things usually go? Bugs will appear after the fact. Individual programs and application change over time and inevitably something will break and/or not work as intended anymore.
As for (3D) performance, I don't see what the big fuss is about. Fglrx is usually on par with the Windows driver in this regard, with individual applications exhibiting issues here and there (ex. WINE, which is not really a performance issue). The driver is currently going over some significant changes in Composite support, which for the mean time means crappy Compiz/Kwin performance; these issues will eventually be ironed out.

Lets examine that then...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=897&num=1

Here we have 2 games benched Quakewars and Doom3, Windows is slightly ahead on Doom3, and fglrx has a good lead on Quakewars. And unfortunately thats not enough to base a conclusion on.

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=731&num=1

Heres another one that is a little bit older dated may 2007, so it may be on the older 3d stack in which case it doesnt really count. Clearly fglrx is getting its ass handed to it. And here again this is too old to base a conclusion on.

I couldnt find anything else on any web site that directly compares fglrx to the windows driver. But I didnt look that hard so there may be more information out there.

[Melcar]

Processor: AMD Phenom 9650 Quad-Core @ 3.04GHz (Total Cores: 4), Motherboard: DFI LP DK 790FX, Chipset: ATI RD790 + SB600, System Memory: 3900MB, Disk: 640GB WDC WD6401AALS-0, Graphics: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series 512MB (750/1100MHz), Monitor: Acer X193W+

Unigine Tropics                                                        
OpenGL                                                                     
1680x1050                                                                
4x AA                                                                          
16x AF                                                                         
Shaders High                                                           
Textures High                                                           
Filter Trilinear                                                            
Reflection                                                                  
Refraction                                                                  
Occlusion                                                                  
Volumetric 
                                                                                  
Ubuntu 8.10                                                     
fps: 25.7                                                                 
score: 648                                                              

Windows XP                                                          
fps: 26.6                                                                  
score: 670        

 Unigine Sanctuary   
OpenGL
1680x1050 
4x AA
16x AF
Shaders High
Textures High
Filter Trilinear
Translucence
Parallax Mapping
Occlusion
Reflection
Refraction 
Scattering  
Volumetric 
HDR
DOF

Ubuntu 8.10    
 fps: 28.1  
score: 1190  

Windows XP
fps: 28.1
score: 1191

Nexuiz
Ultra @ 1680x1050

Windows XP:

36 61 139

Ubuntu 8.10:

36 66 181

Doom 3
Ultra
4x AA
16xAF
1680x1050


Windows
XP
122.4 fps

Ubuntu 8.10
127.3 fps

Furmark (through WINE)

1680x1050
4xAA
16xAF

Ubuntu 9.04
min 51
max 81
avg 58

Windows XP
min 48
max 80
avg 57

[duby229]

Just so I understand... are you saying that this approach isn't working for NVidia either ?

Not really no. I think nVidia does have a much better closed driver than ATi, but it still has it's share of long unresolved bugs. Even after all of these years I still cant get Compiz to run on both of my monitors when using a zaphod style. nVidia knows the problem exists, but they blame it on Compiz. There are other issues too like switching VTs, or hot plugging monitors. These are just bugs that have gone unresolved for years, not even counting the flaws in the closed source model.

In recent months nVidia has been releasing new drivers left and right, but that hasnt always been the case. It was once a big problem waiting for nVidia to release drivers that support the latest kernel or the latest X server. Although nVidia releases drivers constantly now, they wouldnt have to if the driver was open source.

I'm not saying that an open source driver is easier, but I am saying that it is better.

EDIT: Heres what I'm trying to say, Windows works very well for closed source drivers because the APIs stay the same year after year. It never changes and closed drivers can rely on that to do what they need to do. I can install a three year old driver on XP SP3 right now and it will work perfectly. It may not have the newest features or support that the most recent driver has but it will work perfectly fine on my card. The same is --NOT-- true of Linux. Linux was designed specifically with open source software in mind in that APIs dont stay the same between versions. The open source model requires bundling. It needs you to bundle your code with the latest release. Modern distros are built on open source projects that all have this same requirement. Open source operating systems require open source drivers. nVidia is trying to overcome the flaws of there closed driver model by brute force, and it isnt going to last forever. I still firmly believe that Fusion is going to crush nVidia. When that time comes and they arent capable of sustaining there brute force approach they will be truly screwed, and everyone who still uses nVidia cards on Linux will be too. Lets all hope that Nouveau continues on and matures. That is the only hope for nVidia users in the long term.

[bridgman]

OK, now I understand your point.

Here's the twist - enterprise distros provide the same kind of stable APIs as Windows. They typically run with the same X server and kernel for 3 years or more, backporting changes in to enable new hardware and fix security issues, so binary drivers have no problems keeping up. The workstation market mostly uses those enterprise distros, which also explains why our "supported distro" list is mostly made up of RH and SuSE distributions.

For the rest of the distros, and for typical consumer users, I agree completely that open source drivers are the way to go. We also believe that open source drivers are essential to take full advantage of Fusion.

[agd5f]

Even after all of these years I still cant get Compiz to run on both of my monitors when using a zaphod style.

The composite extension doesn't work with xinerama in general at the moment.