Page 22 of 29 FirstFirst ... 122021222324 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 220 of 282

Thread: AMD Radeon HD 5750/5770

  1. #211
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Panix View Post
    I want to start using Linux more but if I have to deal with constant patching and 'ATI issues' compared to 'standard binary install' of Nvidia drivers, I don't know which I would choose. But, since watching videos and 3D is important to me, I would probably consider a Nvidia card if it moves down in price enough. I'd pick the poison that is the least headache although I'd want to choose the ATI card because of the potential benefits but not if I have to google every time xorg or the kernel changes. Is that reasonable? I'm not a Linux/XORG expert and my 2nd computer, an old laptop, sucks so I don't like my desktop to 'be down' for too long a time.
    If you can't wait for another 6 months I'd highly recommend you go the nVidia route. I think the previous posts might be understating the issues with Catalyst and overstating issues with the nVidia driver.

    If you're into fiddling with your install, maybe ATI is a viable option, but if you want to be able to throw a CD into your system have have it pretty much just work right nVidia is the best bet.

    I want the feature set of the ATI hardware, but that feature set isn't currently available to the Linux user, so people can argue all they like about ATI's superior hardware (but not that much more superior), unless the software support is there, it's a moot point.

    I myself am trying to stall my next graphics card purchase as long as I can but it's looking like I myself will have to go with an nVidia card. I'll probably go with a GTX260. Then, the next time around, given the way Catalyst is coming along, it should be good to go in about 6 - 12 months.

  2. #212
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    762

    Default

    Panix: ATI doesn't support new kernels/xorg-versions as quickly, but: do you really need that? You said you don't want headaches, so are you going to use bleeding-edge-versions of anything? "Stable" distros don't just use new kernels right away, either.
    ATI takes care to support kernels and xorg-versions that are used in releases of their supported distros - if you pick one of those, fglrx will support the used kernels soon enough.
    In short: if you like bleeding-edge-distros and frequent aggressive updates, stay away from fglrx. Otherwise, it doesn't matter much.

    Video is a different issue. If you need hardware video decoding, you need either VDPAU (nvidia) or Xvba (ATI), but neither of those works out of the box without installing additional software or git versions. The nvidia-solution is more mature though.
    Without hardware video decoding, fglrx has two xvideo-bugs: no vsync and slightly washed out colours. I still use xv because they don't bother me, if they bother you then you'd either need to get xvba working or use opengl-output.
    xv with nvidia doesn't seem to have vsync either (although nvidia-settings claims it does), but the colours are correct. But sometimes, it takes a few seconds to switch to fullscreen for no apparent reason.

    video *editing* should be unaffected, at least on linux. The editors I know work in 100% software anyway.


    For your use cases, nvidia's drivers are currently better, but that doesn't have to stay forever. If you're planning to keep the card for 3+ years, I'd personally bear fglrx for now and wait for the OS drivers to mature - in fact, I did. fglrx introduced a few bugs, a few nvidia-specific bugs went away, altogether I'm happy.


    Quote Originally Posted by mugginz View Post
    If you're into fiddling with your install, maybe ATI is a viable option, but if you want to be able to throw a CD into your system have have it pretty much just work right nVidia is the best bet.
    I don't know what distro you guys use, but for me, there's a whopping difference between
    ~> emerge -av nvidia-drivers
    and
    ~> emerge -av ati-drivers
    Usually both work.

    Quote Originally Posted by mugginz View Post
    so people can argue all they like about ATI's superior hardware (but not that much more superior), unless the software support is there, it's a moot point.
    the "superior hardware"-tag also includes less power draw at the same performance, which is readily available without software support
    I think you're over-focusing the *current* state of affairs. Which is ok if you buy a new card every couple of months, but short-sighted if you keep 'em around for years.

  3. #213
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rohcQaH View Post
    Without hardware video decoding, fglrx has two xvideo-bugs: no vsync and slightly washed out colours. I still use xv because they don't bother me, if they bother you then you'd either need to get xvba working or use opengl-output.
    xv with nvidia doesn't seem to have vsync either (although nvidia-settings claims it does), but the colours are correct. But sometimes, it takes a few seconds to switch to fullscreen for no apparent reason.
    I've not found XV on an nVidia to have vsync issues with either no compositing, compiz or kwin composited.

    Quote Originally Posted by rohcQaH View Post
    video *editing* should be unaffected, at least on linux. The editors I know work in 100% software anyway.
    3D editing might be a different thing altogether though. Blender, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by rohcQaH View Post
    For your use cases, nvidia's drivers are currently better, but that doesn't have to stay forever. If you're planning to keep the card for 3+ years, I'd personally bear fglrx for now and wait for the OS drivers to mature - in fact, I did. fglrx introduced a few bugs, a few nvidia-specific bugs went away, altogether I'm happy.
    Some others have tried this route and been badly burned. They've bought good cards and watched them become badly obsolete while waiting for fglrx to mature. It's this that weights heavily on my mind.

    Quote Originally Posted by rohcQaH View Post
    the "superior hardware"-tag also includes less power draw at the same performance, which is readily available without software support
    And if he had a laptop I'd consider that this may out-way other concerns. Not so much for a desktop though.

    Quote Originally Posted by rohcQaH View Post
    I think you're over-focusing the *current* state of affairs. Which is ok if you buy a new card every couple of months, but short-sighted if you keep 'em around for years.
    The experience of others buying ATI cards, only to watch them slowly rot from an obsolescence point of view due to poor drivers is very relevant. Others have bought on the assumption of better software support coming in a 6 month time frame and then been burnt, so it's definitely worthy of strong consideration. Speaking for myself I'll wait for software support and then buy hardware.

  4. #214
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    912

    Default

    People sound so dramatic here - 3D pretty much well works fine. That's for fglrx and nvidia binaries, with the reason being simple: workstation cards need that most of all. The vast majority of people complaining have issues with something not working with compiz, video tearing with xv (the colours from xv with fglrx have been explained elsewhere) or some issue with wine (wine problems are amongst the quickest to be fixed I've noticed).
    If desktop eye-candy and bleeding edge kernels aren't the issue, then look at power consumption, 3D performance, and cost.

  5. #215
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    997

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rohcQaH View Post
    Panix: ATI doesn't support new kernels/xorg-versions as quickly, but: do you really need that? You said you don't want headaches, so are you going to use bleeding-edge-versions of anything? "Stable" distros don't just use new kernels right away, either.
    ATI takes care to support kernels and xorg-versions that are used in releases of their supported distros - if you pick one of those, fglrx will support the used kernels soon enough.
    In short: if you like bleeding-edge-distros and frequent aggressive updates, stay away from fglrx. Otherwise, it doesn't matter much.

    Video is a different issue. If you need hardware video decoding, you need either VDPAU (nvidia) or Xvba (ATI), but neither of those works out of the box without installing additional software or git versions. The nvidia-solution is more mature though.
    Without hardware video decoding, fglrx has two xvideo-bugs: no vsync and slightly washed out colours. I still use xv because they don't bother me, if they bother you then you'd either need to get xvba working or use opengl-output.
    xv with nvidia doesn't seem to have vsync either (although nvidia-settings claims it does), but the colours are correct. But sometimes, it takes a few seconds to switch to fullscreen for no apparent reason.

    video *editing* should be unaffected, at least on linux. The editors I know work in 100% software anyway.


    For your use cases, nvidia's drivers are currently better, but that doesn't have to stay forever. If you're planning to keep the card for 3+ years, I'd personally bear fglrx for now and wait for the OS drivers to mature - in fact, I did. fglrx introduced a few bugs, a few nvidia-specific bugs went away, altogether I'm happy.



    I don't know what distro you guys use, but for me, there's a whopping difference between
    ~> emerge -av nvidia-drivers
    and
    ~> emerge -av ati-drivers
    Usually both work.


    the "superior hardware"-tag also includes less power draw at the same performance, which is readily available without software support
    I think you're over-focusing the *current* state of affairs. Which is ok if you buy a new card every couple of months, but short-sighted if you keep 'em around for years.
    I might need a newer kernel. I read newer ones would be better if I decide to get a SSD drive. Also, there are other developments in the kernel that might be beneficial for certain hardware and utilities.

    I like versatlity and who knows, I might want to do a variety of things I do now. I need 3D for google earth and stuff like Gimp or similar. I also watch video/movies so I would like a decent picture so I don't have to use Windows on it. I'm planning on using Debian more whether it's Ubuntu or sidux so maybe 10.04 and recent sidux. They are supported (for the ATI driver, kernel 2.6.33 and Xorg 7.1?)? Currently, I dual boot Debian flavors and Fedora. I think I should specialize now since I think it's better to be really good one one than decent on multiple ones. Although, I will probably keep the Fedora install or install on Virtualbox. Nothing against Fedora, though, it's just that I'm not proficient and I think I need to improve more so I'll concentrate on improving on one system. I think Fedora is so bleeding edge anyway and the ATI proprietary driver doesn't work the best in the latest Fedora?

    I guess I could take a chance on a mid-level ATI card like HD 4890 or HD 5770 since they would still be in demand if I had problems. I could still bug people here when I need help and use Google search?

  6. #216
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mirv View Post
    People sound so dramatic here - 3D pretty much well works fine. That's for fglrx and nvidia binaries, with the reason being simple: workstation cards need that most of all. The vast majority of people complaining have issues with something not working with compiz, video tearing with xv (the colours from xv with fglrx have been explained elsewhere) or some issue with wine (wine problems are amongst the quickest to be fixed I've noticed).
    If desktop eye-candy and bleeding edge kernels aren't the issue, then look at power consumption, 3D performance, and cost.
    But if you're asking people to forgo the advantages of Compiz then you need to have a good reason. While the desktop cube is far from necessary, there are actually some very good other reasons to run either Compiz or kwin with compositing on.

    XV may not be critical because GL can be used, so this work around is far from troubling.

    Wine is handly to have up your sleeved if you do happen to want to run a Windows game, and here nVidia is king for the time being.

    If you want to use 3D apps in a composited environment and ATI now does a good job of this, then at least that's one less thing to worry about.

    At the end of the day if you have no allegiance to either ATI or nVidia, surely you should go with the solution that has the best user experience at the time of purchase.

  7. #217
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    270

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Panix View Post
    I'm looking at prices for cards in my desired budget limit of $150 and if I stretch that or wait, I could get a HD 5770. But, I have read it's not as good as Nvidia for playing video and video editing. I guess that goes ditto for 3D and ATI's drivers develop way more slowly and are buggy in Linux.

    The closest comparison for Nvidia is GTS 250 and 260 GTX but these are EOL so not sure I'd want to pay 'new' price and are harder to find. They are older generation, too, but at least drivers in Linux are up to date and I don't have to worry about patching or problems when the kernel updates.

    One more complaint is the power saving in the binary driver would work and you'd need it with this card. At least, the HD 5770 doesn't run as hot and has less power consumption. Is ATI ever going to catch up to the comparative CUDA features and be competitive as a HTPC card or as good with video editing? If I was ready to buy in a month (when Fermi is introduced and current cards might be reduced in price), is there any chance for advancement in ATI drivers, seriously and honestly?

    I want to start using Linux more but if I have to deal with constant patching and 'ATI issues' compared to 'standard binary install' of Nvidia drivers, I don't know which I would choose. But, since watching videos and 3D is important to me, I would probably consider a Nvidia card if it moves down in price enough. I'd pick the poison that is the least headache although I'd want to choose the ATI card because of the potential benefits but not if I have to google every time xorg or the kernel changes. Is that reasonable? I'm not a Linux/XORG expert and my 2nd computer, an old laptop, sucks so I don't like my desktop to 'be down' for too long a time.
    If you go for a Nvidia card you could also buy a GeForce 9800 GTX+ instead of a GeForce GTS 250, because it is only a different name and cost also a bit less money!

    Instead of producing new products Nvidia often only renames their cards to have a "new" product. Other examples of this: the OEM card GeForce GT 340 is the same as a GeForce GT 240. GeForce 9800 GT is equal to a GeForce 8800 GT.

    If you want to play windows games with wine, a Nvidia card is a safer choice. The videoplayback of the Radeon cards is not much worse than with Nvidia cards, but with the catalyst driver there can be tearing problems in videos, especially in videos with higher resolution (HD videos).

    The videoplayback with the opensource radeon driver looks better and is without tearing. I read somewhere that powersaving with radeon drivers will be introduced in the 2.6.34 kernel for the radeon cards of the 4000 series.

  8. #218
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    762

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mugginz View Post
    I've not found XV on an nVidia to have vsync issues with either no compositing, compiz or kwin composited.
    I'm pretty sure it used to work, but right now on my notebook it doesn't. Reason unknown.
    (I've said before that a little tearing doesn't bother me; I'm running a multi-monitor-system that's bound to tear on at least one monitor, so I got used to it.)


    I'm using fglrx with kwin3 and kwin4 (both composited) btw, works fine so far.

  9. #219
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    762

    Default

    btw, I wouldn't bet on a price-drop on pre-fermi cards. Nvidia has shown that they try hard to keep the prices *up* by relabeling the cards and selling them as something new.

    They cannot expect much revenue from fermi, so they're trying to milk the old generation for every penny. Unless fermi is being sold in huge quantities (not happening anytime soon), there's no reason for drops.


    I'd almost bet that they'll try to sneak in a few of their old GPUs with fermi-like product names

  10. #220
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    880

    Default

    Well if you're saying that fglrx provides as seamless an experience as the nVidia blob does then there's no reason not to buy an ATI card.

    I'm still to this day reading of a lot of problems people are having with fglrx though. Don't get me wrong, I actually want to buy an ATI card, but I'm personally not prepared to burnt as other have been.

    I'm going to see if I can arrange a lend 5770 for a week and give it a good going over. If there aren't any problems I'll certainly buy it. If there are, then it'll be another nVidia card for me.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •